Interest in the construction of passive buildings with the possibility of reducing energy consumption for heating and cooling by up to 90% compared to a conventional building is also increasing in Greece.
According to what the president of the Hellenic Passive Building Institute, Stefanos Pallantzas, reports to “N”, “increased interest in combating climate change and reducing carbon emissions has led many to turn to sustainable construction practices, such as passive buildings .
Europe is a pioneer in the construction of passive buildings. In some countries, such as Germany and Austria, the percentage of new construction that follows the passive construction standard can reach 10-20%. In some regions and projects, the rate may be even higher. In our country, passive buildings are now increasing rapidly.”
As for the extra cost for constructing a passive building compared to a conventional one, Mr. Pallandzas notes that “it can vary depending on many factors, such as the location, the size of the building, the experience of the builder, and the specific technologies and materials. that are used.
In Europe and in our country, the additional cost for constructing a passive building normally varies between 5% and 8% compared to a conventional building. Good planning and an experienced team undertaking the project can reduce additional costs to zero.
In the long term, owners of passive buildings certainly realize significant savings in operating costs due to reduced energy consumption, which can offset the additional initial construction costs within a maximum of 5 years.”
Meanwhile, an existing old building can be renovated and converted into a passive building, however, as Mr Pallantzas notes, “this can be challenging and expensive. The process of transforming an old building into a passive building requires significant interventions and careful planning to meet strict energy efficiency standards. Renovation can be expensive, especially if the building is old and requires extensive work. Some buildings may have restrictions that make it difficult to apply certain measures, as is the case with historic buildings with protected facades. Renovation can take a long time, especially if the work is extensive and complex. In any case, the technical-economic study proves that the passive building “makes its money” in any case”.
It is observed that the basic specifications that a building must meet to be classified as “passive”, among others, are:
Annual energy consumption for heating and cooling must not exceed 15 kWh/m² per year.
Total primary energy consumption, including heating, cooling, domestic hot water and electrical appliances, must not exceed 120 kWh/m² per year.
The building must be highly airtight, thermal bridges must be minimized to reduce heat loss and prevent condensation, and the mechanical ventilation system must include heat recovery (HRV) or energy recovery (ERV) with a recovery efficiency of at least 75%.
Furthermore, windows and doors must have a low U-value and be positioned to minimize thermal bridges, while the building must be designed to harness solar energy in winter and be protected from overheating in summer. This includes proper orientation, use of shadows, and taking advantage of natural shading.
We also asked Mr. Palantzas for the opinion of the Hellenic Passive Building Institute on the incentives given by NOK for the construction of buildings with reduced energy consumption as part of the ongoing debate on height:
“The Hellenic Passive Building Institute follows with particular interest and attention the public debate and controversies regarding NOK and the height of buildings in the urban areas of Attica.
EIPAK considers that the discussion in question, as it develops, does not
offers absolutely nothing to the constant search for something better and more
sustainable and more energy efficient buildings. On the contrary, the rhetoric
extremes and judicial entanglements that lead the incompetent to judge and
decide, can lead to the exact opposite result,
that is, in worse buildings.
Today we shouldn’t be discussing the height of buildings and issues that
other countries and big cities have been solving them for decades. Not today
we should even be discussing whether the Local Government has resources and
authority, but also know-how and experienced human resources to
intervenes in serious urban planning issues and decides how
a city develops. And still we waste time and argue why
we maintain a society that has learned for decades and still wants
build in an anarchic and arbitrary way and at the same time say “do what you want,
but not in my own backyard.”
Today we should discuss and act immediately on how
avoid the new generation of energy arbitrariness created by
A++ buildings that are so in name only due to their inherent weakness
KENAK to provide reliable results and the engineers to get it right
and reliable energy planning.
Today we should be discussing the city’s total independence from
fossil fuels, to electrify all the buildings that need them
progressively become NZEB, that is, have little demand and produce
from RES the energy they need through net metering mechanisms and
Net and per vehicle revenue for modern energy communities.
Today we should be discussing and finalizing the plan on how to do this
we will enter the harsh urban fabric and renovate apartment buildings in
Kypseli, Patisia, in Neo Kosmos but also in Tavros, Kallithea
and Nea Smyrni, where until now no one has done and no program
Save did not dare to intervene in buildings with better energy. Without her
energetic update of these areas is fun to talk about
sustainability of the city, through carbon neutrality and efficiency
combat energy poverty.”
The president of EIPAK also calls on the Ministry of Environment, Local Self-Government and TEE “instead of publicly confronting each other without substance, to immediately jointly resolve the NOK ambiguities that lead to extremes and to sit down at the table and discuss how we want the city develops in the coming critical years to deal with the climate crisis.”
Furthermore, it calls on the Ministry of the Interior and TEE “to further strengthen environmental incentives in NOK and KENAK for even more sustainable and energy-efficient buildings and to create the appropriate control mechanism to eliminate the performance gap between planning and implementation.” The know-how and tools exist and EIPAK is already using them in projects such as the modernization of the apartment building for refugees in Tavros. If we truly want climate neutrality by 2050, then we need to stop talking off topic and take immediate action in the right direction.”