It is commonly assumed that buildings certified as “green” or “energy efficient” can save energy at operational stage, especially the buildings that achieved highest certification levels using green rating tools. However, literature shows that not all highly rated buildings consume less energy at operational stage (Oates et al. 2012). The differences in the estimates of energy savings may stem from the methodological quality of the studies comparing certified buildings with other buildings, especially the choice of the comparator group and indicators of energy performance. Objectives
We aimed to locate and summarise peer-reviewed published empirical evidence for the energy efficiency of new green-rated office buildings. Additionally, we collected information on the time and resources needed to perform this rapid review.
Cooperative Research Centre for Low Carbon Living 2018
A rapid review on green-rated office buildings, and their operational energy use, found that the conclusions of six studies ranged from the certified buildings performing worse, similarly or much better than the non-certified buildings in terms of energy usage intensity. Two...Read more
Industry misconceptions around high cost and poor market interest in energy efficient homes continue to obstruct the mass adoption of low carbon housing. Josh’s House demonstrates that low carbon housing is accessible and cost effective. The Star Performers series showcases how...Read more
In response to feedback, high-income households can reduce their energy use to a larger degree than low-income households (17% vs 3% reduction). This and other insights were gained by two rapid reviews into research, both Australian and International, on digital services and...Read more
The main question guiding this rapid review was: “Drawing on secondary literature that employs systematic review and meta-analytic approaches, what do we know about digital services and communication platforms that allow for residential customer engagement and interaction with the energy system?”
The main question guiding this rapid review was: “Drawing on primary and secondary literature employing various approaches, what do we know about digital services and communication platforms that allow for residential customer engagement and interaction with the energy system in Australia?”
This guide is aimed for the teams who conduct rapid reviews on topics and questions not just for their own use (or publication in an academic journal), but also for stakeholders (or “end users of reviews”; usually policymakers or practitioners).
This study examines the sources of evidence that influence decision-makers who design or develop office buildings, and aims to explain why some managers engage more in evidence-based practice (EBP) than others. A mixed methods approach is conducted that combines quantitative results from 187 senior managers in the built environment and qualitative data from 18 interviewees.