How to Prioritize Energy Efficiency Intervention in Municipal Public Buildings to Decrease CO2 Emissions? A Case Study from Italy

The Role of Non-Energy Impact Assessment in Boosting Energy Efficiency and Urban Regeneration Projects: The RenOnBill Project and Experiences from Liguria Region

Buildings play a significant role in terms of energy consumption and polluting emissions production across Europe and this huge contribution to consumption and environmental impact becomes even more alarming when attention is switched from single buildings to entire urban systems. Although great efforts have been made to support energy efficiency investments, distrust and suspicion are shared attitudes among private investors (and stakeholders in general) towards large-scale implementation of these kinds of projects. Within this framework, on-bill schemes were implemented in the United States more than 30 years ago. In particular, on-bill energy efficiency is a method of financing energy efficiency improvements that uses the utility bill as the repayment vehicle. A detailed analysis of on-bill schemes is currently addressed by the H2020 RenOnBill project, which focuses on these schemes to enhance and support large-scale investments for energy efficiency and deep residential stock renovation. In this study, firstly, the authors focus on assessment methodologies for non-energy benefits of retrofitting projects; then, a case study of the Liguria region (Italy) is examined in depth for its interesting legal framework regarding energy efficiency-led urban regeneration projects. The results deriving from the initial analysis of projects and the case study lead the authors to reiterate that, even today, projects based on energy efficiency usually focus exclusively on energy impacts and that energy performances and urban quality are addressed in separate ways.

Comment on Pietrapertosa et al. How to Prioritize Energy Efficiency Intervention in Municipal Public Buildings to Decrease CO2 Emissions? A Case Study from Italy. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 4434

This paper responds to the article by Pietrapertosa et al., doi:10.3390/ijerph17124434, published previously in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. Its aim is to discuss the appropriateness of the studied method, to analyze its weak sides and to propose its robustness improvement. Thus, data presented in the above study were examined and recalculated, yielding, among others, indicators of annual energy savings (in kWh per m² of total heated area) and specific proposals investment costs (in € per m² of total heated area). By analyzing the obtained data for all public buildings, a significantly simplified approach to this problematic has been suggested while several other features of the research method and some presented results lack proper reasoning and discussion. Individual approach to each public building has been proposed and discussed point-by-point to enhance the method’s applicability. As a result, more realistic outcomes are obtained, and suitable investment actions can be proposed.

Reply to Comment on Pietrapertosa et al. How to Prioritize Energy Efficiency Intervention in Municipal Public Buildings to Decrease CO2 Emissions? A Case Study from Italy. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health , 17, 4434

This is a reply to the paper by Miroslav Variny [...].