1 The Faculty of Engineering and Science (ENG), Aalborg University, VBN2 Department of Civil Engineering, The Faculty of Engineering and Science, Aalborg University, VBN3 Indoor Environmental Engineering, The Faculty of Engineering and Science, Aalborg University, VBN4 Division of Architectural Engineering, The Faculty of Engineering and Science, Aalborg University, VBN5 Strategic Research Centre on Zero Energy Buildings, The Faculty of Engineering and Science, Aalborg University, VBN6 unknown7 Department of Mechanical Engineering
A recent benchmarking study on implementation on EPBD 2002 by REHVA (Seppänen & Goeders 2010) revealed a large variation in the energy performance regulations of the different countries. Not only the performance levels are different, but even the units, in which the performance is measured are different. Primary energy, delivered energy, various energy frames and even CO2 emissions are used. Such differences in regulations have a significant effect on the building industry, and complicate manufacturing, sales, installation, construction and design of buildings in the common market area. The experience learned from the actions taken by CEN from the year 2002 to help the implementation of EPBD showed that technical development work takes time. However, it can be seen that EPBD is establishing a common methodology, as majority of the countries already use or are moving to use primary energy in the definition of energy performance in [kWh/m2,a]. Many countries have prepared long term roadmaps with detailed targets, Figure 1. Such roadmaps help the industry to be prepared and committed to the targets. For example, in Norway, zero energy buildings are expected in 2027, but in UK carbon neutral buildings already in 2017.