Refurbishment Scenario to Shift Nearly Net ZEBs Toward Net ZEB Target: An Italian Case Study

  • Marina Mistretta
  • Matteo Arcoleo
  • Maurizio Cellura
  • Davide Nardi Cesarini
  • Francesco Guarino
  • Sonia Longo


The idea of a Net ZEB arises from the development of design criteria and construction methods, addressed to curb the operating energy, increasing the energy efficiency of building equipment and appliances, and of the thermal insulation of envelope components, and enhancing the on-site energy generation, by means of renewable energy sources, to cover the annual building energy loads. In this chapter, the energy and environmental performances of an Italian nearly Net ZEB following a life cycle approach are carried out. Then, a scenario of refurbishment is foreseen in order to shift the studied building from the nearly Net ZEB condition toward the Net ZEB target, and the arising energy and environmental benefits are assessed. The life cycle approach in the energy and environmental assessment of the foreseen retrofit options is necessary to avoid shifting environmental burdens from one step of the life cycle to another. Further, in order to get a deeper description of the energy performance of the retrofit actions and to compare the different alternatives, the energy payback time (EPT) and the emission payback time (EPT) are assessed for the proposed solutions.


Life Cycle Assessment Life Cycle Impact Assessment Baseline Scenario Primary Energy Consumption Eutrophication Potential 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Ardente F, Beccali G, Cellura M, Lo Brano V (2005) Life cycle assessment of a solar thermal collector: sensitivity analysis, energy and environmental balances. Renew Energy 30:109–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ardente F, Beccali M, Cellura M, Mistretta M (2008) Building energy performance: a LCA case study of kenaf fibres insulation board. Energy Build 40:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ardente F, Beccali M, Cellura M, Mistretta M (2011) Energy and environmental benefits in public buildings as a result of retrofit actions. Renew Energy Sustain Rev 15:460–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Battisti R, Corrado (2005) A Environmental assessment of solar thermal collectors with integrated water storage. J Cleaner Prod 13:1295–1300Google Scholar
  5. Beccali G, Cellura M, Mistretta M (2001) Managing municipal solid waste: energetic and environmental comparison among different management options. Int J Life Cycle Assess 6(4):243–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blengini GA, Di Carlo T (2010) The changing role of life cycle phases, subsystems and materials in the LCA of low energy buildings. Energy Build 42:869–880CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown B, Aaron M (2001) The politics of nature. In: Smith J (ed) The rise of modern genomics, 3rd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Cellura M, Campanella L, Ciulla G, Guarino F, Nardi Cesarini D, Lo Brano V, Orioli A (2011) A net zero energy building in Italy: design studies to reach the net zero energy target. In: Proceedings of building simulation 2011, an IBPSA—AIRAH conference, Sydney, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen TY, Burnett J, Chau CK (2001) Analysis of embodied energy use in the residential building of Hong Kong. Energy 26:323–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Directive 2002/91/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2002 on the energy performance of buildingsGoogle Scholar
  11. Directive 2006/32/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2006 on energy end-use efficiency and energy services and repealing Council Directive 93/76/EECGoogle Scholar
  12. Directive 2010/31/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 May 2010 on the energy performance of buildings (recast)Google Scholar
  13. Dixit MN, Fernández-Solís JL, Lavy S, Culp CH (2010) Identification of parameters for embodied energy measurement: a literature review. Energy Build 42:1238–1247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Frischknecht R, Jungbluth N, Althaus HJ, Doka G, Dones R, Heck T, Hellweg S, Hischier R, Nemecek T, Rebitzer G, Spielmann M (2007) Overview and methodology. Ecoinvent report no. 1, ver. 2.0, Swiss centre for life cycle inventories. Dübendorf (CH)Google Scholar
  15. Gustavsson L, Joelsson A (2010) Life cycle primary energy analysis of residential buildings. Energy Build 42:210–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hernandez P, Kenny P (2010) From net energy to zero energy buildings: defining life cycle zero energy buildings (LC-ZEB). Energy Build 42:815–821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. IEA (2013) SHCTask40/ECBCS Annex 52, towards net zero energy solar buildings. http://task40, (Last accessed 08/02/2013)Google Scholar
  18. Lo Mastro F, Mistretta M (2004) Cogeneration from thermal treatment of selected municipal solid wastes. A stoichiometric model building for the case study on Palermo. Waste Manage 24(3):309–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Napolitano A, Sartori I, Voss K (2012) Net zero energy buildings: a consistent definition framework. Energy Build 48:220–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. PRè-Product Ecology Consultants (2010) SimaPro7.2, environmental database 2010. Amersfoort, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  21. Salom J, Widén J, Candanedo J, Sartori I, Voss K, Marszal A (2011) Understanding net zero energy buildings: evaluation of load matching and grid interaction indicators. In: Proceedings of building simulation 2011: 12th conference of international building performance simulation association, Sydney, 14–16 Nov 2011Google Scholar
  22. Sartori I, Hestnes AG (2007) Energy use in the life cycle of conventional and low energy buildings: a review article. Energy Build 39:249–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sartori I, Napolitano A, Voss K (2012) Net zero energy building: a consistent definition framework. Energy Build. doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.01.032
  24. The International EPD Cooperation, General Programme instructions for Environmental product declarations, EPD. Version 1.0, 2008Google Scholar
  25. Torcellini P, Pless S, Deru M (2006) Zero energy buildings: a critical look at the definition. ACEEE Summer Study, Pacific GroveGoogle Scholar
  26. TRNSYS v. 16.1 (2003) A transient system simulation program. Solar Energy Laboratory, University of Wisconsin Google Scholar
  27. UNI EN ISO 14040 (2006) Environmental management—life cycle assessment—principles and framework, International organisation for standardisationGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marina Mistretta
    • 1
  • Matteo Arcoleo
    • 2
  • Maurizio Cellura
    • 2
  • Davide Nardi Cesarini
    • 3
  • Francesco Guarino
    • 2
  • Sonia Longo
    • 2
  1. 1.Dipartimento Patrimonio Architettonico e UrbanisticoUniversità degli Studi Mediterranea di Reggio CalabriaReggio CalabriaItaly
  2. 2.University of Palermo, Viale delle ScienzePalermoItaly
  3. 3.Loccioni Group, Angeli di RosoraAnconaItaly

Personalised recommendations