首页> 外文期刊>A+BE : Architecture and the Built Environment >Policy Instruments to Improve Energy Performance of Existing Owner Occupied Dwellings
【24h】

Policy Instruments to Improve Energy Performance of Existing Owner Occupied Dwellings

机译:改善现有业主居住房屋能源绩效的政策工具

获取原文
           

摘要

The aim of this thesis is to add knowledge to the role and impact of policy instruments? in meeting energy performance ambition in the existing owner occupied housing stock.? The focus was instruments available in the Netherlands in 2011 and 2012. These? instruments represented the ‘on the ground’ efforts to meet climate change targets? and many continue to do so today in the same or slightly altered forms.? At international level there is a recognized need to keep global temperatures within? the range of 1.5 - 2°C above pre-industrial levels (Carrington, 2016). At European? level, the 2020 package contains a series of binding legislation to help the EU meet? its more immediate climate and energy targets. 2020 targets include 20% reduction? in greenhouse gas emission, 20% of EU energy obtained from renewable sources and? 20% improvement in energy efficiency. 2020 targets for the Netherlands are a 20%? reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and a 14% increase in energy generation from? renewable sources (Vringer et al., 2014).? A raft of policies has been produced over the last number of decades from international? to local level to orientate action towards targets. At European level the Energy? Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD) drives efforts at reducing energy among? one of the biggest players, the building sector. By requiring a mandatory certificate? at the point of sale and rent of buildings and making regulatory demands on existing? buildings the EPBD upped the ante of what could be expected from the building sector,? but especially the existing dwelling stock.? National governments have already been tackling existing dwellings for decades? propelled by the energy crisis and later by climate change policy. Information? campaigns, subsidies, energy taxes, energy loans and tailored advice are among the? instruments that have been available to homeowners to carry out works on their? dwellings to reduce energy consumption. In recent years, the pace of efforts has? increased due to, inter alia, the realization that the revolution in energy use that must? occur for climate change targets to be met means major changes in the fabric of the? existing dwelling stock, dwellings constructed before building regulations demanded? high energy performance standards. It is argued that the building sector, in general,? and the existing dwelling stock, in particular, can contribute more cost effectively and more significantly in quality and quantity terms than any other sector (Amstalden et al.,? 2007; Lomas, 2010; ürge-Vorsatz, et al., 2007). This has provoked calls for new and? improved instruments to meet the energy saving potential of existing dwellings. Despite many of the same instruments being used for decades there is little solid? information on many crucial dimensions of how instruments operate and on what? impact they have. The few evaluations and reviews that do take place are commonly? focused on theoretical energy savings and costs and instrument strengths and? weaknesses. Instruments commonly appear and disappear without undergoing? improvement or change or contributing to policy learning. Many instruments are laden? with assumptions about the target group that are never formally or comprehensively? proved or debunked. Little theorizing takes place on the type of instruments most? suited to the target group. Fundamentally, there is a serious lack of information? surrounding the effectiveness of instruments assumed to be making climate change? targets a reality. It is the above mentioned information deficits that influenced the objectives? and structure of this thesis. Instruments are examined from different angles and? viewpoints, from experts, owner occupiers, official evaluations and front-runner? countries. Assessment frameworks were developed to tease out how well instruments? truly function. Households in receipt of instruments such as the EPC and energy audit? were compared to households not in receipt of instruments. Moreover, the complete? range of national instruments available at the time of the survey were studied to? present a complete picture. A more detailed description of the methodologies adopted? is presented below. Methodology An aim of research was to offer qualified accounts and a deeper analysis of how? instruments for energy performance improvement in existing dwellings function.? Research components focused on both individual instruments and combinations? using a triangulation of methods and sources: expert interviews, a survey and literature? review. The first step towards meeting the aim of research was to characterise and? assess national instruments in the Netherlands. In the absence of an assessment? framework for policy instruments in this domain one was created using elements? of the theory based evaluation method and concepts from literature. All national? energy performance instruments operating at the time that could influence energy ? performance improvement for sp
机译:本文的目的是为政策工具的作用和影响增加知识。在满足现有业主拥有住房存量方面的能源绩效雄心。重点是2011年和2012年在荷兰可用的工具。这些吗?文书代表着实现气候变化目标的“实地”努力吗?如今,许多人仍以相同或略有改动的形式继续这样做。在国际一级,是否有必要将全球温度控制在一定范围内?比工业化前水平高1.5-2°C(Carrington,2016)。在欧洲?级别,2020年一揽子计划包含一系列有约束力的立法,以帮助欧盟实现目标?其更直接的气候和能源目标。 2020年的目标包括减少20%?在温室气体排放中,欧盟20%的能源来自可再生能源,以及?能源效率提高20%。荷兰的2020年目标是20%?减少了温室气体排放,并将能源产生量增加了14%?可再生资源(Vringer等,2014)。在过去的几十年中,国际上制定了许多政策?到地方层面,以针对目标采取行动。在欧洲一级,能源? 《建筑物性能指令》(EPBD)推动着减少能源消耗的努力吗?建筑行业是最大的参与者之一。是否需要强制性证书?在建筑物的买卖和租赁方面,并对现有法规提出要求?建筑物EPBD提高了建筑部门的期望值?但尤其是现有的住宅。各国政府数十年来一直在解决现有住房问题?由能源危机推动,后来又由气候变化政策推动。信息?运动,补贴,能源税,能源贷款和量身定制的建议都在其中?房主可用来对房屋进行工程的工具?减少能耗。近年来,努力的步伐有哪些?尤其是由于认识到必须进行能源使用革命?发生要实现的气候变化目标意味着结构的重大变化吗?现有住房,在建筑法规要求之前建造的住房?高能源绩效标准。有人认为,建筑部门总体而言?尤其是现有的住宅,在成本和数量上比其他任何部门都更具成本效益,并且贡献更大(Amstalden等,2007; Lomas,2010;ürge-Vorsatz等,2007)。这招来了新的呼吁?改进的仪器,以满足现有住宅的节能潜力。尽管数十年来使用了许多相同的仪器,但几乎没有固体?有关仪器如何操作以及如何操作的许多关键方面的信息?他们有影响。进行的几次评估和审查通常是?侧重于理论上的节能量,成本和仪器的优势,以及?弱点。乐器通常不经过而出现和消失?改进或更改或有助于政策学习。有很多乐器?关于目标群体的假设从未正式或全面地出现过?证明或揭穿。关于哪种类型的乐器,很少进行理论化?适合目标人群。从根本上来说,严重缺乏信息吗?围绕被假定为导致气候变化的手段的有效性?针对现实。是上述信息不足影响了目标吗?和论文的结构。仪器是从不同角度检查的?从专家,业主,官方评估和领先者的角度来看?国家。评估框架的开发是为了弄清楚工具的质量如何?真正发挥作用。接受EPC和能源审核等工具的家庭?与没有收到仪器的家庭进行比较。而且,完整吗?对调查时可用的国家文书范围进行了研究?呈现完整的图片。对采用的方法有更详细的描述?如下所示。方法论研究的目的是提供合格的账目并对方法进行更深入的分析?现有住宅功能中改善能源性能的工具。研究内容集中在单个工具还是组合上?使用三角剖分的方法和来源:专家访谈,调查和文献?评论。达到研究目的的第一步是表征和?评估荷兰的国家文书。在没有评估的情况下?这个领域的政策工具框架是使用元素创建的?基于理论的评估方法和文献中的概念。所有国家的?当时可能会影响能源的能效仪器? sp的性能改进

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号