Optimal Energy-retrofit strategies

for existing buildings in Finland,

now and in the future
1960’s concrete panel apartment blocks

Master’s thesis

Tampere University

Faculty of Built Environment

The School of Architecture

Primesa Arapi, August 2021

 Energy-retrofit strategies 3

Primesa Arapi
Master’s thesis Optimal Energy-retrofit strategies for
Optimal Energy-retrofit strategies for existing buildings in Finland, now and in the future
1960’s concrete panel apartment blocks
existing buildings in Finland, now and
Tampere University
Faculty of Built Environment in the future
The School of Architecture
August 2021

Examiners / Supervisors
Assistant professor Sofie Pelsmakers, Tampere University
Postdoctoral researcher Raul Castano De la Rosa, Tampere University
1960’s concrete panel apartment blocks
4 Energy-retrofit strategies Energy-retrofit strategies 5

ABSTRACT
Tampere University
Faculty of Built Environment
The School of Architecture
August 2021
Master’s Thesis

Author Primesa Arapi

Title Optimal Energy-retrofit strategies for existing buildings in Finland, for now and in
the future - 1960’s concrete panel apartment blocks
Examiners/ supervisors Assistant professor Sofie Pelsmakers, Tampere University
Postdoctoral researcher Raul Castano De la Rosa, Tampere University
Year 2021
Number of pages 92
Language English

This thesis aims to research how energy-retrofits
can improve the energy-efficiency, operational
carbon emissions and indoor thermal comfort of
1960’s Finnish concrete-panel apartments, with
retrofit strategies that can be effective now and in
the future. Three main criteria are developed to
evaluate optimal strategies, them being “energy
efficiency criteria” (total energy use ≤ 130 kWh/
m2yr, space heating energy ≤ 30 kWh/m2yr), “car-
bon emissions criteria” (lowest emissions possi-
ble) and “thermal comfort criteria” (too cold ≤ 21°C
- 27 °C ≤ too hot).
Retrofit strategies are developed from literature
review of energy-efficiency regulations in cold cli-
mates and academic studies on energy-retrofits
in these countries. Identified retrofit measures
are simulated on a case study building in Finland
for TRY 2020/2030, 2050, 2080 and all 4 Finnish
Thermal Zones, under RCP8.5 scenario, using
Sefaira energy- modelling software.
Finally, most effective energy-retrofit strategies
for Finnish concrete-panel apartments of 1960’s
are suggested. Optimal strategies are identified
using the evaluation criteria and considering the
limitations in existing buildings such as complicat-
ed/ unfeasible installations. Findings can be used
to develop retrofit strategies for different Finnish
thermal zones as well as other cold climates.
Results suggest that improving space heating de-
mand should be targeted to reach higher reduc-
tions in total energy use. Thesis also raises ques-
tions about the retrofit combinations and whether
the physical limitations of existing buildings can be
used as an advantage. For instance, simulations
indicate that a hybrid strategy which proposes dif-
ferent retrofit measures for building facades based
on orientation and solar radiation, might be as ef-
fective as very high energy efficiency standards
on all facades, even though it would require less
insulation and investment.

keywords energy retrofit, energy-efficiency, space heating energy, operational carbon emissions, indoor
thermal comfort, concrete-panel apartments, existing buildings, cold climate, future climate

The originality of this thesis has been checked using the Turnitin Originality Check service.
8 Energy-retrofit strategies Energy-retrofit strategies 9

Table of Contents

1. Introduction..................................................................................... 10

1.1 Thesis scope and structure........................................................... 11

1.2 Research objectives .................................................................... 12

2. Energy-efficiency and existing buildings ........................................ 14

2.1 European standards on energy-efficiency ................................... 15

2.2 Energy-retrofit strategies for existing buildings............................. 16

2.3 Energy-retrofit strategies in cold climates (Literature Review)......22

2.3.1 Scandinavian countries (Norway, Sweden)............................... 24

2.3.2 Baltic countries (Estonia, Lithuania)...........................................28

2.3.3 Finland....................................................................................... 31

2.4 Lessons learned............................................................................36

3. Kerava Concrete Panel Apartment Block, Case Study................... 38

3.1 Methodology ................................................................................ 39

3.1.1 Energy-efficiency criteria............................................................ 39

3.1.2 Carbon emissions criteria...........................................................39

3.1.3 Indoor thermal comfort criteria................................................... 39

3.1.4 Climate zones and RCP scenario.............................................. 40

4.Results and discussion.................................................................... 42

4.1 Energy-performance of building in original condition.................... 42

4.2 Energy retrofit measures by building component .........................48

4.3 Energy retrofit measures in combinations.....................................52

5. Conclusions.....................................................................................60

References..........................................................................................66
Appendix A.......................................................................................... 73
Appendix B..........................................................................................81
10 Energy-retrofit strategies
1. Introduction
We are living in a time of environmental crisis
where the climate is changing, temperatures rise,
and precipitation amounts increase. Natural eco-
systems, agriculture, flora and fauna are endan-
gered because their environments are not the same
(Blogger, 2018; Dantas, 2018; Morecroft & Speak-
man, 2015; Weiskopf et al., 2020, p. 137782; WWF,
2017). People encounter health issues, resource
scarcity or discomfort in their living spaces.
While long-term climate predictions foresee more
floods, draughts, wildfires and heat waves (CMIP6
Climate Projections, 2021; Collins et al., 2013;
Hayhoe et al., 2017; Masson-Delmotte et al.,
2021), these events already interact with the build-
ing skin, structure and operation. They can dam-
age the structure or foundation, cause heat loss or
overheating, even lead to the collapse of buildings
(IFRC, n.d.; National Geographic, n.d.). In order to
overcome this crisis, buildings need to meet the
expected comfort levels, living conditions and
structural feasibility, now and in the future (Hao
et al., 2020, p. 7557; Sukanen, 2020).
Changes in climatic conditions are strongly affili-
ated with global warming and risen greenhouse
gas (GHG) concentrations in the atmosphere.
The building and construction industry contributes
to the annual GHG emission levels with a share
of 38% (United Nations Environment Programme,
2020), while a building is responsible for impact-
ing the environment throughout its lifetime, includ-
ing the processes before and after its construction.
In response, many studies have been focused on
using the built environment itself to reduce its
own damage.
One way to address this emergency is simply by
improving how our building performs, in terms of
the energy it uses for daily operations such as
conditioning the occupied spaces, equipment and
lighting, and that which it produces from renewable
energy sources. The model and technical require-
ments for such an energy efficient building are
defined by building codes and building standards.
These documents are usually updated every few
years with improvements regarding their perfor-
mance. Changes are a result of developing tech-
nologies, material properties and EU energy-effi-
ciency targets.
The meaning of energy-efficiency and the extent
of required measures to reach an energy-efficient
building often vary for different building types, func-
tions, year of construction as well as the energy-ef-
ficiency concept defined in national regulations. For
example, the Finnish Ministry of Environment sets
different targets for new and existing buildings.
A comparison can be made in the Finnish E-val-
ue targets, which represent the annual energy
consumption taking into consideration the energy
carriers and heating energy demand (Ministry of
the Environment, 2013). The Decree on the Ener-
gy Performance of New Buildings sets a limit of 90
kWhE/(m2 a) for the E-value of apartment blocks
(Ministry of the Environment, 2017) while the De-
cree on Improving the Energy Efficiency of Build-
ings in Conjunction with Repair and Modification
Works has specified the calculation method in-
stead: “E required ≤ 0.85 x E calculated” (Ministry
of the Environment, 2013). This looks at possible
improvements without setting an ambitious target
since it is harder to achieve energy efficiency in old
buildings.
Many studies explore different improvement strate-
gies for warm climates and mainly public buildings,
but the research on energy-efficient strategies
for existing buildings is limited, more so for old
residential apartment blocks in cold climates
(Niemelä et al., 2017). A recent study argues that
70% of current building stock will exist in the year
2050 (Ruggeri et al., 2020).
Many others use past and present climate data and
not the future climate models. There is a lack of
understanding how the improved building performs
in the future periods of its life, therefore develop-
ing energy retrofit strategies where future climate
change scenarios aren’t considered might prove
ineffective.
Adequate retrofits are important for existing build-
ings because they usually need improvements/
maintenance every ~30 years (Lindahl & Sacco,
2016; Pelsmakers, 2015; Ruggeri et al., 2020). It
is an important opportunity to prolong the building
life before it comes to an end (Ruggeri et al., 2020),
hence, there is no room for mistakes. The existing
buildings need energy-efficient improvement strat-
egies which are effective now and in the future.
1.1 Thesis scope and structure
As one of the most GHG emitting sectors, the built
environment can contribute to mitigate climate
change and withstand its effects by improving its
energy performance and related carbon emis-
sions. Due to aging and low standards of energy
efficiency, existing buildings can be more energy in-
tensive. This is most likely due to their construction
year and lack of energy regulations. According to
Niemelä et al. (2017), the most common typology of
European housing stock consists of concrete-pan-
el apartment blocks built between 1960-1990s.
The building regulations of these years do not meet
with the current energy-efficiency targets, therefore
most of the existing residential buildings in Europe
are energy intensive (EU Buildings Factsheets,
2016).
Existing buildings can be improved through differ-
ent intervention strategies such as building reno-
vations and retrofits. Renovation means restoring
the building’s physical condition to its original state
(Cambridge Dictionary, 2021) while retrofitting re-
fers to changing the building state by adding new
components that didn’t exist before interventions
(Eames et al., 2014). These changes might include
replacing or upgrading building elements, such
as installing more efficient windows or insulation,
building services like mechanical systems or build-
ing use, in order to improve building’s energy per-
formance and reduce related CO2 emissions (Che
Husin et al., 2019; Shnapp et al., 2013; STBA, n.d.).
Since the existing housing from the 1960s isn’t
based on energy efficient design, renovating an
existing building to its original condition would not
improve it enough to meet today’s minimum en-
ergy-efficiency requirements or be efficient in the
future climate change scenarios. Hence energy-ret-
rofits will be investigated, which improve the build-
ing to a better condition than its original state. They
are strongly related to improving building’s opera-
tional energy, including energy consumption from
mechanical systems, lighting and household equip-
ment (Tam & Le, 2019), all of which are compo-
nents that can be replaced and upgraded.
More specifically, the study focuses on the ener-
gy-efficiency improvements in concrete sand-
wich panel buildings, since most of Finnish res-
idential housing from 1960-1990’s is built with this
structure (Build Up, 2019; Niemelä et al., 2017b;
Nieminen & Virta, 2016). Long-term effects of
retrofit strategies are evaluated, to find out if the
Energy-retrofit strategies 11
future climate changes affect the building energy
use under different retrofit scenarios. It’s important
to consider that there will always be new develop-
ments in retrofit implementations, building material
performances, system efficiencies, etc. Also, many
retrofit strategies that have a high implementation
cost today, can become cost-efficient in the future.
In order not to limit the preliminary findings to the
present-day economic capacity, technology and
building practices, the energy-retrofit measures
are evaluated based on three main criteria: “ener-
gy-efficiency”, “operational carbon emissions”
and “indoor thermal comfort”.
The study consists of two main parts, them being
literature review and energy performance sim-
ulations on a case study building. The retrofit
strategies that derive from literature review (chapter
2) and preliminary simulations of individual building
components’ energy performance (chapter 3) will
be used to develop retrofit combinations.
Total energy demand (kWh/m2 yr) and space heat-
ing energy (kWh/m2 yr) will be used for the “ener-
gy-efficiency” criteria, to compare and identify the
optimal strategies. Annual carbon emissions from
energy use on site (kgCO2e/yr) will be used for
“operational carbon emissions” criteria, to find
out the differences in environmental impact after
retrofits. Indoor temperature changes over the year
(too cold < 21°C-27°C < too hot) will be used for
“indoor thermal comfort” criteria, to assess the
occupant comfort and living conditions which may
worsen or improve as a result of retrofit measures.
This work is organized as follows:
First, energy-efficiency standards in Europe are
considered, especially cold climates where energy
use and space heating demands are much higher
in old buildings. Study includes literature review of
energy-retrofit strategies and applications in resi-
dential housing (chapter 2). Findings are used as a
basis for developing energy-retrofit strategies that
would be effective on concrete panel apartments.
This part consists of the sections on energy effi-
ciency in buildings, energy efficiency standards in
Europe and differences in cold climates. Building
retrofits in Finland, Scandinavian and Baltic coun-
tries are reviewed, to see the effects of a colder cli-
mate in retrofit decisions and effects.
Main questions to be addressed are: What is the
importance of energy consumption in existing
buildings and how can it be improved? How does
Europe regulate energy efficiency in existing build-
ings? What differs in regions with a cold climate?
12 Energy-retrofit strategies
The key findings are listed at the end of the chapter.
Then, the study looks at the retrofit strategies on
a specific building, respectively a concrete panel
apartment block of 1960s in Finland. Different en-
ergy-retrofit strategies are tested, where the energy
analysis is conducted using Sefaira software.
First, the retrofit measures are applied separately
when the other building components stay as in orig-
inal condition. Then, measures are mixed in retrofit
combinations and simulated on the building. The
strategies are evaluated for all four of the Finnish
thermal zones, using test reference years TRY for
2020/2030, 2050 and 2080 (Finnish Meteorological
Institute, n.d.).
This part looks to answer the questions: How do
different building components affect energy con-
sumption, carbon emissions and thermal comfort in
Finland, and how do they perform in combinations?
What are the most effective strategies to reduce
building energy use and related carbon emissions
while maintaining good indoor thermal comfort? Are
the identified energy-retrofit strategies still effective
in future climate change scenarios?
1.2 Research Objectives
While the discussions and developments on energy
efficiency continue, there is a need to identify opti-
mal energy-retrofit strategies in cold climates, for
existing buildings with poor energy performance.
This work is focused on the optimal strategies for
Finland, which could provide an understanding for
energy-retrofit applications and their effect in simi-
lar climates.
Recent studies mainly test different retrofit mea-
sures for new buildings, public buildings and de-
tached residential houses. However, there is limit-
ed academic research on the retrofit combinations
of old concrete panel apartment blocks (Niemelä
et al., 2017b). Residential buildings form 75% of
the EU existing building stock and concrete panel
apartments built between 1960-1990 are the most
common type in EU and Finland, with highest en-
ergy consumption levels (Bonakdar et al., 2014;
Csoknyai et al., 2016; European Commission,
2017; Kuusk & Kalamees, 2015; Niemelä et al.,
2017b; Paiho et al., 2013). Hence there is a need
to analyze this building typology further. Reviewed
literature confirms that most of these buildings are
inefficient and will eventually require retrofit mea-
sures to meet the EU targets.
Energy-retrofit strategies 13
The academic studies and building regulations
focus on retrofitting the building envelope, me-
chanical systems and renewable energy systems,
through individual or combined strategies that
provide low-energy or low-carbon buildings with
cost-effective solutions. (Bonakdar et al., 2014; Du
et al., 2015; Häkämies et al., 2015; Hirvonen et al.,
2020, 2021; Holopainen et al., 2016; Kuusk, Kala-
mees, et al., 2016; Kuusk & Kalamees, 2015; La
Fleur et al., 2019; Lindahl & Sacco, 2016; Niemelä
et al., 2017b; Nieminen & Virta, 2016; “NZEB Re-
quirements in Nordic Countries,” 2019; Palm & Re-
indl, 2016; Qu et al., 2020).
However, initiatives like financial support schemes,
differing market prices as well as technical develop-
ments through time will likely change the outcome
of the analyses that rely heavily on economic feasi-
bility. Moreover, there is a gap in testing long-term
energy performance and low-carbon impacts of ret-
rofit solutions and understanding how the retrofitted
building will perform in the future climate scenarios.
Effects of climate change are already influencing
the building thermal comfort levels and energy con-
sumption. For example, summer overheating re-
sults in longer operating hours of HVAC systems
to cool the building, hence building end-use energy
consumption and living costs might rise. Besides
the health issues, there is a risk of power outages
and energy poverty (Sukanen, 2020).
In response, this study aims to identify optimal en-
ergy-retrofit strategies for existing concrete-pan-
el apartments in cold climates, which improve the
current building energy performance and maintain
the levels of low energy demand over the forthcom-
ing years. In this thesis, the strategies are tested
for Finland, using Finnish climate zones which are
characterized as cold and arctic, using a typical
concrete-panel apartment of 1960’s located in Ker-
ava. Finally, the thesis aims to provide a better
understanding of:
1. How do different building components affect en-
ergy consumption, carbon emissions and thermal
comfort in Finland, and how do they perform in
combinations?
2. What are the most effective strategies to reduce
building energy use and related carbon emissions
while maintaining good indoor thermal comfort?
3. Are the identified energy-retrofit strategies still ef-
fective in future climate change scenarios?