The European Union has established since 2002 a common policy for energy efficient buildings and low environmental impact materials and systems, promoting energy efficiency and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), expressed by means of a series of directives, regulations and policies. Therefore, the European Parliament approved the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD) 2002/91/EC and its recast, the Directive 2010/31/EU. Based on Article 9 of Directive 2010/31/EU, until the end of 2020 all buildings ought to be nearly Zero Energy Buildings (NZEB), when new buildings operated and owned by public authorities must be NZEB after January 1 st 2019. An NZEB building is referred to as a building which has a high energy overall performance and its quantity of energy needed ought to be covered to a quite substantial range by energy from renewable sources, as well as energy from renewable sources generated on-site or nearby. For the case of Cyprus, the limit is set to 125 kWh/m2 of primary energy consumption annually, with a minimum of 25% of this energy resulting from renewables. For Greece this goal has still to be determined. Except from those Directives, the EU set the main goals for energy, transport and GHG emissions not only for 2020 but also for 2030 and 2050. Considering GHG emissions, the legislation framework is supported by a series of international standards such as the Greenhouse Gas Protocol Initiative and the ISO 14064-65 series of standards which are fully compatible with the GHG Protocol and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Considering the recast of the EPBD, in form of Directive 2018/844/EU, a detailed database is developed of the European, Greek and Cyprus energy and environmental legislation (Directives, Laws, Regulations and policies) for buildings focusing on commercial ones. It is presented in this paper, along with a comment of how a common framework can be adopted in two national regulations and how it can be effectively turned into practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Giama et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: