Learning from failure: Understanding the anticipated-achieved building energy performance gap

Fedoruk, L E; Cole, R J; Robinson, J B and Cayuela, A (2015) Learning from failure: Understanding the anticipated-achieved building energy performance gap. Building Research & Information, 43(6), pp. 750-763. ISSN 0961-3218

Abstract

Over the past 20 years a number of studies have identified and provided explanations for a significant performance gap' between designed and actual energy performance of buildings. The anticipated and achieved energy performance of an advanced, innovative building that aspired to net-positive energy performance is studied: the Centre for Interactive Research on Sustainability (CIRS) building at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada. Selected performance failures that became evident during operation of CIRS are studied for how they were discovered and the efforts required for their resolution: the energy systems and associated controls and monitoring. The key findings show the barriers were neither economic nor technical. Instead, the primary impediments were institutional regimes-arising from the ways that various life-cycle stages were specified, contracted and implemented. The key issues emphasize the importance of having meaningful and effective building energy monitoring capabilities, an understanding of energy system boundaries in design and analysis, crossing the gaps between different stages of a building life cycle, and feedback processes throughout design and operation. The disclosure of failure and lessons learned is a valuable contribution to subsequent advancement for the building stakeholders and the wider professional and research communities.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: building design; building operation; building performance; buildings; energy monitoring; failures; feedback; lessons; performance gap
Index terms: energy performance, building life cycle, energy monitoring, boundaries, building design, lessons learned, building operation, building performance, resolution, Canada, energy performance gap, building stakeholder, energy system, performance gap, monitoring
Subjects: performance management, sustainability and energy, quality assurance, property law, energy systems, Geography, architectural design, professional development, asset management, control systems, management, conflict resolution, sociology
Topics: Information Management, Design Practice, Legal Issues, Sustainability, Stakeholder Management, Business Strategy, Quality Management, Geographical Context, Site Management
Descriptive scope: 2 PC

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here