IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS You may also like

- How can the circular economy-
Trends in the cost-benefit analysis of energy digitalization infrastructure support
transformation to strong sustainability?
efficiency measures as part of the renovation wave Samuel D Allen and Joseph Sarkis

- Commerce:A yen for industry

Kenneth Spring
To cite this article: M Buchholz et al 2022 IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 1085 012043
- Inverse vibration problems for finite-
element models
G M L Gladwell

View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 62.92.22.17 on 17/10/2023 at 08:39

SBE22DELFT IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1085 (2022) 012043 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1085/1/012043

Trends in the cost-benefit analysis of energy efficiency

measures as part of the renovation wave

M Buchholz1, A Enseling2 and T Lützkendorf1,3

1
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Department of Economics and Management,
Centre for Real Estate, Chair for Sustainable Management of Housing and Real Estate,
Kaiserstraße 12, 76131 Karlsruhe, Germany
2
Institute for Housing and Environment, Rheinstraße 65, 64295 Darmstadt, Germany
3
matthias.buchholz@kit.edu

Abstract. The goal of sustainable development within planetary boundaries poses new
challenges to the actors of the real estate industry. One task is to improve the energy performance
of existing buildings by deep energy retrofit measures. The aim is not only to conserve resources
and reduce emissions, but also to ensure that buildings can be rented out and marketed, and that
a loss of value is avoided. In addition to technical issues and aspects of dealing with existing
building fabric, questions of assessing their economic viability play a role in the selection of
suitable measures. Against the background of a project in Germany to develop a methodological
convention, this paper introduces basics for cost-benefit analyses of energy efficiency measures.
Furthermore, the following questions will be discussed: (1) How can the introduction of carbon
pricing conventions be aligned with external climate and environmental costs? (2) How can be
dealt with non-monetary factors in investment appraisals? (3) How can typical perspectives of
actors be classified and what are the consequences for the necessary adjustment of appraisal
methods? (4) How can the general trend towards greater consideration of uncertainties be taken
into account? Possible solutions are discussed and recommendations for action are presented.

1. Introduction
The goal of making Europe a climate-neutral continent by 2050 requires that the building sector makes
a significant contribution. In addition to the planning and construction of net zero energy/emission
buildings, it is also important to significantly improve the energy/carbon performance of existing
buildings and to further accelerate this process. The renovation wave was initiated for this purpose [1].
To achieve the ambitious goals, it is not only important to have suitable products and systems as well as
sufficient planning and construction capacities, but also to identify and overcome existing obstacles.
One obstacle is doubts about the economic (and ecological) benefits of corresponding measures.
There exist a number of important actors that are involved in the improvement of the energy
performance of existing buildings as part of an overall renovation, e.g. owners in their role as decision-
makers, clients and financiers. The individual actors (from owner-occupiers in the sense of households
to professionally managed housing and real estate companies and the public sector) use different
methods as a basis for their decisions, face different categories of costs and benefits, have different
attitudes to risks and develop specific readiness to act on the basis of their specific options for action.
This also applies to dealing with non-economic factors (e.g. design, impacts on environment and health).
While in the past this was typical for owner-occupiers and amateur landlords with a close relationship
to the building, companies are also increasingly interested in these topics. They have realised that this

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
SBE22DELFT IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1085 (2022) 012043 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1085/1/012043

is important for sustainability reporting, but also for risk analysis and value development, and that it can
have an impact on the value of the company. In addition, a part of the industry with long-term strategies
is increasingly willing to take responsibility for the environment and society and to contribute to
sustainable development. Short-term thinking investors are influenced in this direction by changing
framework conditions (e.g. EU Taxonomy). A better understanding of investment appraisal methods,
their adaptation to new challenges and their target group-specific application become a prerequisite for
the success of the European renovation wave.

2. Basics of cost-benefit analyses for energy efficiency measures

Improving the energy efficiency of buildings is a major key in the combat of climate change since
building-related energy consumption still relies on fossil fuels and thus directly correlates with the
emission of greenhouse gases. The energy efficiency of a building generally stands for the ratio of the
energy expenditure used to serve a specific goal. There exist a variety of terms to describe the process
of improving the energy efficiency. In this contribution, energy efficiency measures will be understood
according to the definition of energy renovation by the European Commission: As part of the European
renovation wave, energy renovations describe the change of building elements to achieve improvements
in the energy efficiency of a building [2]. Energy renovations can be distinguished by depth depending
on the percentage of energy savings after a renovation compared to the original state. In scientific
literature, deep energy renovations are often called “deep energy retrofit” (DER).
Besides the technical feasibility, the economic viability of energy efficiency measures is of big
importance for building owners and stakeholders like public authorities. The term “profitability” can be
used in this sense to indicate whether the economic achievement of a specific measure is positive or
negative [3]. In specific, a measure is profitable in an absolute sense if the income exceeds the expenses,
or the revenues exceed the costs. Such projects should be realised provided that all other requirements
are met. Relative profitability is given when the ratio of income to expenditure or income to costs is
more favourable for a measure or variant than for an alternative solution. The comparative variant can
also consist of a "do nothing" alternative. The basis and starting point are the payment flows occurring
in the life cycle of the building or component with their incoming and outgoing payments [4].
As energy efficiency measures have a complex flow of incoming and outgoing payments, static
methods for assessing the profitability are rather inappropriate. The dynamic investment calculation, on
the other hand, resolutely addresses the timing of payments. This consideration is important, since
investment costs are incurred, especially at the beginning of an energy renovation, whereas savings or
additional revenues only accrue in later periods. Furthermore, in the case of energy efficiency measures
in buildings, a long economic life or a long calculation period is assumed, and thus an energy renovation
that considers interest and compound interest effects is essential for a realistic view on profitability [5].
The actors to be considered often determine the basic choice of perspective to be adopted in a cost-
benefit analysis. In the microeconomic perspective, the costs determined directly via market prices (e.g.
the investment costs of an energy renovation) are compared with the benefits determined directly via
market prices (e.g. the savings in energy costs or the additional rental income) from the perspective of,
for example, owner-occupiers or landlords. In the macroeconomic perspective, the overarching view of
the national economy is taken. Socio-political goals can be considered in the calculations, for example
resource conservation, environmental or climate protection (via external effects, see section 4) [4].
Regardless of the investment appraisal method used, there exist typical variables with influence on
the economic viability of an energy efficiency measure. In practice, the result of a cost-benefit analysis
depends on a number of boundary conditions. These boundary conditions, that can be summarised in
characteristic categories, influence variables on the basis level of a triangle-hierarchy which is shown in
figure 1. Since boundary conditions incorporate numerous direct and indirect effects on the relevance
of variables, it is part of a cost-benefit analysis to examine the respective relevance. A challenge can be
the identification of important interdependencies that exist between variables. Values of basic variables
are calculated for intermediate results that can either be on the cost-side or the benefit-side. The
allocation of costs and benefits culminates in a result that is defined by the conventions of an investment

2
SBE22DELFT IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1085 (2022) 012043 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1085/1/012043

appraisal method (see figure 1). The method itself also defines the relevance of influencing variables
from lower levels to a certain extent.

Net Present Value

Annual Profits
Internal Rate of Return
Amortisation
Whole Life Cost
VoFi-Return
Equivalent Energy Price
CO2-Abatement Cost
Results

One-time expenses
(' Property value)
' Running expenses
Energy cost savings
' End-of-life expenses

Intermediate results COSTS BENEFITS

Investment ' Rental
cost income

' Maintenance cost Grants

' Energy cost
Financing cost ' External cost
Categories of
variables

Scale of Owner- Property User Legal Economic

measure Perspective conditions requirements conditions factors
Boundary conditions

Figure 1. Hierarchy of selected variables in a cost-benefit analysis of energy renovations

3. Selected trends and issues

A trend is a long-term development that brings along structural and lasting changes. Trends cannot
always be forecasted, but the more observations with the prove of changes exist, the more likely a trend
will expand. The following list shows a selection of trends in the cost-benefit analysis of energy
efficiency measures that show significant relevance now and in the near future based on the authors’
opinion:
a) The reduction of greenhouse gas emissions becomes the main goal of energy renovations and
it is interrelated with achieved energy savings.
b) The relevance of external costs, carbon pricing and shadow prices increases and leads to
questions about their interrelated connections and possibilities for their alignment (see section
3.1).
c) The interest of the public sector to incorporate external effects in political decisions grows.
d) Investment appraisal methods are further extended to include impacts on environment and
society as well as additional non-monetary benefits (see section 3.2).
e) The effect of energy renovations on rent levels, property values and value changes will be
represented more accurate in the future since respective legislation and tools improve.
f) The number of parties that are interested in the economic viability of energy renovations
grows.
g) The need for actor-specific cost-benefit analyses increases (see section 3.3).
h) Requirements on institutional financiers increase since it is their task to foster sustainable
investments by offering special loan conditions.
i) Financial planning exceeds the appraisal of single values by also considering dimension and
timing of future payments.
j) The need for a better understanding of uncertainties grows. Methods like Monte Carlo
Simulation can serve as an appropriate tool in this manner (see section 3.4).

3
SBE22DELFT IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1085 (2022) 012043 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1085/1/012043

k) The formulation of cost-optimal requirements gives way to the use of cost-effective paths to
climate neutrality as the new paradigm of the public sector.
In the following, three different trends (b, d, g and j) will be analysed in detail while possible
consequences for the cost-benefit analysis of energy renovations will be discussed.

3.1. The role of external costs, carbon pricing and shadow prices
All economic activity generally includes externalities which occur in the shape of external effects. The
focus of the public mainly lies on negative external effects, even though externalities can be both,
positive or negative, depending on the affected party and the kind of effect. The sum of negative external
effects is called external costs. The responsible party does not bear these costs, but they have to be faced
by the society in the form of additional social costs. So far, there is no sufficient compensation for
individuals or institutions that are negatively influenced by external effects. Thus, external costs
represent a form of market failure. The issue of external costs gains importance in the context of rising
environmental problems and especially in the combat of climate change, since the emission of
greenhouse gases and the pollution of air, land and water mostly have a global effect.
There are methods to monetise negative external effects. In this sense, climate costs stand for the
external costs that derive from the emission of greenhouse gases while environmental costs consider the
effects of air pollution. However, in practice, the exact calculation of external costs remains challenging
and results need to be evaluated frequently. Due to the uncertainty of future developments, only
estimates of external costs based on currently available data are possible. For the process of calculation,
two main approaches can be distinguished: the calculation of damage costs and mitigation costs. In the
context of climate costs, damage costs try to assess the resulting monetised damage by the emission of
one unit of CO2-equivalent. Mitigation costs stand for the monetised expenses that are necessary to avoid
on unit of CO2-equivalent.
To incorporate external costs in economic decision-making, two basic approaches can be considered:
x Internalisation of external costs e. g. in form of taxes or charges (a popular instrument is the use
of CO2-pricing)
x Voluntary incorporation of external costs
While the internalisation method stands for a cash-effective approach, voluntary incorporation only
means the consideration of external costs as an imputed value. Both approaches should orientate on the
expected true value of external costs. A current problem is that the values of cash-effective
internalisation like the pricing of CO2-emissions in Germany remains far below scientifically based
levels of external climate costs.
A solution to this problem could be the use of so-called shadow prices. There is no standardised
definition for the term, but a shadow price can be described as the assignment of a value to an unpriced
commodity. The goal is the representation of the true value of a good if market prices do not fulfil this
requirement. In the context of monetising external effects, shadow prices can compensate for the
insufficient ability of taxes and charges to represent true external costs. For the situation in Germany,
the authors suggest a shadow price for CO2-emissions at a level that derives from the difference between
scientifically based climate costs (in this case damage costs) and the current value of CO2-prices. For
illustration, the emission of one ton of CO2 costs 30 euro in 2022 while climate costs suggested by the
German Environmental Agency are 203 euro [6]. The difference of 173 euros could serve as a shadow
price. This approach could be transferred to other countries and other climate or environmental costs
categories.
For different actors in the real estate industry, there are diverging conditions in the incorporation of
external costs and in specific shadow prices. Institutional real estate companies need to find ways to
ensure their contribution in climate and environmental protection while, at the same time, they need to
stay competitive. Private building owners will likely face rising financial burdens and risks due to
increasing CO2-prices in the future which especially becomes clear in the costs for energy supply. A
special role is the one of public authorities: They do not only assess energy efficiency measures from a
macroeconomic perspective, but they also aim to serve as a role model to other decision-makers. For

4
SBE22DELFT IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1085 (2022) 012043 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1085/1/012043

these three kinds of decision-makers, the authors suggest a specific incorporation of shadow prices
which is illustrated in table 1.
Table 1. Actors and external effects
Actor Perspective Incorporation of external effects
Private microeconomic voluntary
Institutional microeconomic recommendable for additional assessment
Public macroeconomic mandatory

3.2. Non-monetary factors in cost-benefit analyses

The dealing of non-monetary factors has already been described in [7], among others. These are, for
example, aspects of thermal comfort or the extension of the life span of buildings. The recording and
evaluation of additional benefits can usefully complement the consideration of external costs (see 3.1).
Owner-occupiers usually benefit directly from such effects. For landlords, it is possible to consider them
as additional success factors and to take them into account directly (via utility value analysis).
Alternatively, they can be included indirectly by translating them back into monetary values via effects
in the risk analysis and in the assessment of the financial performance. In addition, there are intrinsic
motives that aim to support sustainable development. Reducing the emission of air pollutants improves
the situation in the neighbourhood, which can have a positive effect on the value of properties. The state,
in turn, is willing to support the achievement of its non-monetary goals in the field of resource
conservation and climate protection by utilising financial funding. The state itself benefits from this
through tax revenues from higher modernisation activities with a simultaneous decrease in taxes on
energy.

3.3. The relevance of actor-specific cost-benefit analyses

As already stated, the variety of actors that actively make or influence decisions concerning energy
renovations is high. What becomes clear is that current decision-making does not serve the sustainable
energetic transformation of the German and European building stock sufficiently. Too less people decide
to conduct energy efficiency measures on their buildings. For this reason, national legislation and
initiatives like the EU renovation wave aim to incite more investments into the energetic quality of
buildings by offering special funding opportunities, consulting advises etc. Before these instruments can
actually unfold their intended impact on a broader scale, initiators must understand the decision-making
process of potential investors and their specific interests. The decision-making process of different types
of building owners has been frequently examined in the literature in regard to their motives and barriers.
However, relative studies have a tendency to focus owner-occupiers and to neglect the perspective of
private landlords [8]. Furthermore, there is seldomly a clear distinction between the role that an actor
fulfils and his or her interests which he or she pursues in this role. For the provision with adjusted tools
and investment appraisal methods, this is a crucial aspect.
An approach to differ between the legal entity, role and perspective of actors can be adopted from
the literature [9]. Legally, actors are either of private nature or institutional while public institutions can
be seen as a special entity. The actors of these entities fulfil various roles in the context of energy
renovations. The term “role” stands for the meaning that is commonly used for the description of an
actor group in practice [9]. Since there exist numerous roles and the differences between roles are fluent,
the authors suggest breaking down these roles into characteristic perspectives on energy renovations.
Methods for economic appraisal must be applied to self-users, landlords and the public sector in the first
place. While self-users take in a microeconomic perspective and the public sector is obliged to assess
energy renovations on a macroeconomic level, it can be useful for institutional landlords to widen their
microeconomic perspective so that they can better adapt to societal or legislative changes. This concept
goes along with the suggestion in table 1 considering the distinction of perspectives on external effects.
In order to be able to record the costs and benefits of an investment in a suitable manner, the relevant
input variables for the economic appraisal must first be determined and recorded completely. It must be

5
SBE22DELFT IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1085 (2022) 012043 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1085/1/012043

considered that the input variables (cost and benefit categories) are not uniform and differ according to
the different actor groups. Essential input variables for describing the (direct) expenditure include, from
a microeconomic perspective, the construction and running costs (e.g. for maintenance) that result from
the new construction or energy renovation. Relevant input variables for describing the (direct) benefit
are the income to be generated, for example the energy cost savings or, in the case of rented buildings,
the additional rental income for the landlords. In addition to direct costs and direct benefits, external
costs (e.g. environmental costs, expenditure on subsidies) and external benefits (e.g. positive
employment effects, additional tax revenues) can also be considered from a macroeconomic perspective
[10].
From the point of view of the authors, there is consequently a need to specify the requirements on
economic appraisal methods with regard to actor-specific perspectives and particularities.
Profitability in the narrower sense would therefore be given, … (see table 2)
Table 2. Requirements for actor-specific cost-benefit analyses
Perspective Requirements for economic viability Recommended method
Owner- ... if the annual costs (investment and running costs) for energy Annuity Method
occupier saving measures are lower than the annual energy cost savings and Amortisation Period
the measures are fully amortised within their life time. Equivalent Energy Price
Landlord ... if the investment costs for energy saving measures are Net Present Value
compensated by achievable additional rental income and the VoFI-Method
property value remains constant or increases as a result of the
measure.
Public ... if scientifically derived and politically justified goals are Whole Life Cost
sector achieved with minimal financial resources, taking a Calculation
macroeconomic perspective and including external effects. CO2 Abatement Costs
Ecological meaningfulness must be given.

3.4. Dealing with uncertainties

In practice, energy efficiency measures are a complex undertaking in most cases. Reasons lie in the
number of legal, economic, technical, societal or personal conditions. In addition, energy efficiency
measures usually involve capital-intense investments. All these factors lead to high requirements on the
methodology and the results of cost-benefit analyses. For this reason, the focus shifts from the analysis
of single values to the consideration of probabilities that can be assigned to values of variables. Thus,
the decider is not only confronted with a yes-or-no-decision but is able to weigh risks and benefits of
specific alternatives. This approach provides a more appropriate economic decision-making process
since on the other side, e. g. the assessment of technical aspects also contains a consideration of risks
and benefits.
Economic appraisals that use this approach can be characterised as stochastic. The opposite is
represented through deterministic approaches. Popular investment appraisal methods for energy
efficiency measures are still usually used in a deterministic way. Hence, there is the possibility to
transform these calculations so that they work stochastically. Additional to the existing distinction
between static and dynamic investment appraisal methods, this contributes to a four-field matrix to
characterise an approach. Since static methods are generally not recommended because they do not
consider the time value of money, the trend goes to approaches that are dynamic and stochastic.
Table 3. Matrix to characterise different approaches for profitability calculation
Static Dynamic
Deterministic ︠M N
Stochastic O P
Monte-Carlo-Simulation (MCS) is the most popular term to describe a class of algorithms that use a
stochastic approach. The main principle of a MCS contains the generation of random variates on the

6
SBE22DELFT IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1085 (2022) 012043 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1085/1/012043

basis of predefined distribution parameters. These variates are generated in large numbers so that
resulting distributions become stable. A MCS can thus be described as a stochastic scenario analysis. Its
origin goes way back to the secret development of nuclear weapons in Second World War while the
name derives from the analysis of gambling activities in Monte Carlo. Nowadays, many disciplines take
advantage of the benefits a MCS involves: In physics, scientists use the principle to find new molecules,
in finance, MCSs are used to calculate for the risk of different investment alternatives, in climate
research, the method helps to explore different scenarios of global warming. The basic steps for
conducting a MCS can be read in the literature, e.g. [11].
Results of a simulation can easily be illustrated by histograms (see figure 2). Distributions can be
created for basic variables as well as for results and for in-between results. This enables the formation
of a hierarchy of variables that illustrates interdependencies. Figure 2 shows a hierarchy of some of the
most relevant variables and their distributions for calculating the equivalent energy price of an energy
efficiency measure. A big advantage of a software-based MCS is the possibility of conducting a
sensitivity analysis by just changing the parameters of one or more variables and thus their distributions.

Figure 2. Hierarchy of selected variables and their distributions in a MCS

Even though the method of MCSs has not been yet established widely, its’ meaning will increase for the
real estate industry in the future. It offers a more appropriate way to weigh risks and benefits of certain
alternatives. Additional to the assessment of single energy efficiency measures, a MCS can be used for
macroeconomic assessments and thus for the determination of financial support needs, that public
authorities want to meet in order to promote climate-friendly investments.

4. Conclusion and outlook

Conventions for conducting cost-benefit analyses of energy renovations have been changing in the
passage of time. Nowadays, against the urgent need for climate and environmental protection the
necessity of accurate methods and tools for cost-benefit analyses is larger than ever. Some of the main
findings from the analysis of trends above are shortly listed:
x Economic activities generally cause external effects. The man-made pollution of air, water and
land mostly involves negative external effects. A solution in theory to this problem lies in the
internalisation of resulting external costs. In practice, this remains a challenging task and there
are no sufficient solutions yet. The trend goes to carbon pricing with the aim of reducing GHG
emissions, but carbon prices still cover just a small percentage of the linked external costs.
x Non-monetary factors play a significant role in investment decisions. There are ways to
incorporate them in appraisal methods.
x The need for actor-specific cost-benefit analyses of energy efficiency measures grows. One
reason for this is the difference in the perspective of private, institutional and public actors. On
the one hand, influential factors on the economic viability of investments differ for the different

7
SBE22DELFT IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 1085 (2022) 012043 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1085/1/012043

actors. On the other hand, they also lay down divergent requirements on the appraisal method
itself. Therefore, the trend goes to the application of methods for the specific target groups.
x Decision makers wish for appropriate ways of assessing risks and benefits of investment
alternatives since the economic viability of energy efficiency measures depends on numerous
influencing factors and boundary conditions. One way to sensitise potential investors in this
matter is the use of Monte Carlo Simulation (MCS). Instead of a yes-or-no decision, decision-
makers face probabilities for the variables of interest. The risk of decision alternatives becomes
clearly visible since a MCS usually contains 1.000 scenarios or more.
Trends have the potential to serve current goals and at the same time to increase transparency. Still, there
remain a number of open research questions in the interdependent field of politics, economy,
environment and society. These questions will play a role in the announcement contained in the draft of
the future Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD) from the European Commission to
further develop the basis of cost-benefit analyses by 2027 at the latest [12]. The authors hope that this
article already provides first foundations for this.

Acknowledgement
The authors thank the Federal Institute for Research on Building, Urban Affairs and Spatial
Development Germany (BBSR) for the financial support of the project in context of ZUKUNFT BAU,
a German research programme of the Federal Ministry of the Interior and Community.

References
[1] German Federal Environmental Agency 2021 The European Commission’s Renovation Wave
Initiative for the Building Sector
[2] European Comission 2019 Comprehensive Study of Building Energy Renovation Activities and
the Uptake of Nearly Zero-Energy Buildings in the EU p 202
[3] Goetze U Northcott D Schuster P 2015 Investment Appraisal Methods and Models vol 2
(Heidelberg: Springer) p 29
[4] Enseling A Luetzkendorf T 2017 Wirtschaftlichkeit energieoptimierter Gebaeude
Berechnungsmethoden und Benchmarks für Wohnungsbau und Immobilienwirtschaft (BINE-
Themeninfo III FIZ Karlsruhe)
[5] RentalCal Consortium 2018 Financial Viability of Energetic Retrofitting: Modelling your Payoff
gets easy with the Rentalcal Tool (summary of WP6)
[6] German Federal Environmental Agency 2021 Societal Cost of Environmental Pollution
[7] Moermann K Luetzkendorf T 2016 The chain of effects of energy retrofit measures – a
contribution to the project RentalCal Energy Procedia 96 363–74
[8] Naber E Luetzkendorf T Volk R Schultmann F 2019 A Survey of Private Landlords in Karlsruhe
and their Perception of Deep Energy Retrofit OP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental
Science 2019 323 012165
[9] German Federal Ministry for Transport, Construction and Urban Development German Federal
Office for Civil Engineering and Regional Planning 2008 Continuation of the Building Quality
Dialogue
[10] Enseling A Luetzkendorf T 2019 Preliminary Study for Further Development of the Basics of
Economic Appraisals as Reaction to Current Requirements and Developments in Federal
Construction
[11] Raychaudhuri S 2008 Introduction to Monte Carlo simulation Proceedings of the 2008 Winter
Simulation Conference pp 91–100
[12] European Comission 2021 Directive of the European Parliament and of the Councilon on the
Energy Performance of Buildings (Recast)