Or Orga ganiza nizati tion onal persp al perspec ecti tive ves on s on ad adop opti tion on of of en energ ergy effi y efficien ciency cy mea measu sures res in S in Swed wedish ish multi multi- storey store y ap apartmen artment t bu buil ilding dings Gireesh Nair and Inga Carlman Mid Sweden University Östersund, Sweden MILEN International Conference, 22-23 Nov 2012, Oslo, Norway
Role of energy efficiency in mitigation of climate change IEA, 2010
Energy efficiency improvements • A large number of energy efficiency measures are widely available which provide net benefits (IPCC, 2007) However “Nine out of ten technologies that hold potential for energy and CO 2 emissions savings are failing to meet the deployment objectives needed to achieve the necessary transition to a low- carbon future.” (IEA, 2012)
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)
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 • Addition of new houses to the existing stock happens slowly • Government target: to reduce energy use/heated floor area by 50% from 1995 to 2050 • Various policy instruments are used to encourage building owners to adopt energy efficiency (EE) measures
Final energy use in residential and service sector – 1970-2010 (TWh) Source: Swedish Energy Agency, 2011
Atti Attitud tude to towar ards ds cli lima mate te cha hang nge Europe Sweden Well informed about causes 56 and consequences of climate change 88 61 Personally taken action to fight climate change 87 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 % of respondents Source: Europeans ’ attitudes towards climate change; Eurobarometer, 2008
Multi-family apartments Multi-stor Multi storey ey apa partmen tment t bu buil ilding dings • Sweden has about 2.5 million multi-family apartments • Heated floor space in 2010 was about 180 million m 2 ─ 85% apartments are heated by district heating system • Owenership of multi-family apartment apartment buildings 30 % 40 % 30 % Co-operative housing association Private housing companies Municipal housing companies
Co-operative housing associations in Sweden • Tenant-Ownership • Approximately 26500 co-operative housing associations • Executive board headed by chairperson makes decision • Chairperson and board members are elected from apartment owners
Objective and Methodology Overall Objective • To better undersand the co-operative housing associations adoption practices of energy efficiency measures in their buildings Methodology • 2800 questionnaire were sent during June-October 2010 • Address were selected randomly from Bolagsverket • Response rate – 24% Respondent category • About 40% buildings were more than 40 years old • Heating system – 50% district heating, 14% electricity heated, and the rest other heating system
Stages in adoption of an end-use energy efficiency measure Contextual factors Influencing factors Marketing activities of such external Need for a new Physical condition, energy actors as Stage 1 installation cost, old installation sellers/installers Subsidies Collection of Mass media and interpersonal Stage 2 Organizational Information communication, change agents characteristic Size Centralization Perceived advantages Selection of an Slack - Economic Stage 3 installation Complexity - Maintenance Formalization - Environmental Interconnectedness System openness Post-purchase Stage 4 evaluation Adapted from Rogers, 2003
Perception towards energy efficiency (EE) improvement • % 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 However • 76% of associations did not have any plan for energy efficiency improvements in their buildings
Plan to replace building envelope components Building envelope components % of respondents No Yes, within 3 Yes, in 3-10 years 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
Association’s goals Goals % of respondents Agree Neither nor Disagree To keep monthly rent to its members as 79 17 4 low as possible To provide good indoor environment 86 13 7 To be an environmentally friendly 67 24 9 association To become an highly energy efficient 65 27 8 association
Issues regarding investment intensive EE measures in apartment buildings Agree Neither nor Disagree The board does not have own expertise to assess the benefits of EE 54 measures (N=629) Uncertainty about future energy prices makes it difficult to invest in 40 EE measures It is difficult to obtain reliable information about costs and benefits 37 of EE measures Time and effort required to collect necessary information is too high 35 Financial constraints makes it difficult to invest in EE measures 34 If the association reduce heat energy, district heating companies will 26 increase energy price, thus making the effort worthless Changing behaviour like switching off lights is more beneficial than 22 investments in EE measures Investments in EE measures are low priority compared to other 21 measures Members of association does not support investments in EE 8 measures 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 % of respondents
Importance of various factors in respondents’ EE investment decisions Agree Neither nor Disagree Reduce annual energy cost (N=597) 88 Investment cost (N=593) 88 Functional reliability (N=532) 70 Improve indoor environment (N=540) 60 Payback period (N=547) 59 Environmental benefit (N=523) 42 Improve market value of property (N=525) 43 Technical limitation of buildings (N=510) 37 Reduce greenhouse gas emission (N=514) 32 Small/no disturbance to residents (N=523) 33 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % of respondents
Plan for energy efficiency improvements 50 N=196 45 N=143 40 % of respondents N=272 N=246 35 30 25 N=233 N=157 N=459 44 41 N=238 20 N=149 34 33 N=73 15 N=173 22 20 10 19 18 16 14 5 8 0 Yes No Often Sometime Rarely Easy Neither Difficult Important Neither Not nor nor important Board members Frequency: energy Board’s approval Energy efficiency responsible for issues discussed in on energy and association’s energy issues board meeting efficiency image investments
Factors that were not found to significantly influence association’s plan for EE • 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
Conclusions • 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
Th Than ank k yo you for your u for your atten attenti tion on!
Recommend
More recommend
