Danish, Estonian and Finnish NZEB requirements comparison with European Commission recommendations for office buildings in Nordic and Oceanic climates

¹ Tallinn University of Technology, Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, 19086 Tallinn, Estonia
² Tallinn University of Technology, Smart City Centre of Excellence, Ehitajate tee 5, 19086 Tallinn, Estonia
³ Aalto University, Department of Civil Engineering, FI-00076 Aalto, Finland
⁴ Aalborg University, Department of the Built Environment, 2450 Copenhagen SV, Denmark

^* Corresponding author: raimo.simson@taltech.ee

Abstract

Direct comparison of building energy performance levels between countries is usually not possible due to differences in climatic conditions, calculation methods, primary energy (PE) factors and input data. The aim of this paper is to analyse the differences in nearly zero energy office buildings requirements and energy calculation methodology in Denmark, Finland, and Estonia. The study is based on a newly built Estonian office building, designed to meet national NZEB requirements. To account for the climatic differences between the countries a heating-degree-days-based correction factor was applied for building envelope thermal transmittance. NZEB requirements for each country are compared with European Commission (EC) recommended values (EU 2016/1318) using normalization and benchmarking through detailed computer simulations. National NZEB primary energy threshold was needed to be reduced by 7% in Denmark and by 23% in Estonia to meet EC recommendations. At the same time, the flagship reference building, that was better than Estonian NZEB, met both Nordic and Oceanic EC recommendations. Finnish NZEB requirement was not exceeded with any building configuration applied in this study, indicating that Finnish NZEB is considerably less strict compared to Danish and Estonian ones.