Multiple benefits of renovation in buildings - PU Europe

Multiple benefits of investing in energy
efficient renovation of buildings
2. Health benefits from improved indoor climate
Energy efficient renovation of buildings can improve personal health. The health effects
stem primarily from alleviating inadequate warmth through better insulation and more
effective heating systems, more daylight and ventilation. Colder houses place more physiological
stress on older people, sick people and babies, who have less robust thermoregulatory
systems, and are more likely to spend more time inside. 66 Studies have shown that
respiratory and circulatory hospitalisations have been reduced by insulating houses, as
these diseases have shown to be particularly responsive to the effects of temperature. 67
Cold houses are also likely to be damp, which can lead to the growth of mould, which can
cause respiratory symptoms. Improved ventilation and access to daylight may increase
worker productivity, and students’ learning abilities.
By making Energy efficient renovation to buildings, overall health and worker productivity
may therefore be improved. 68 In addition, by improving e.g. indoor air qality and the
inflow of light, worker productivity and the learning capabilities of students may increase.
69
We broadly identify three quantifiable types of health benefits from previous studies. The
benefits accruing to individuals come from improvements in personal well-being (e.g. less
illness, general improvements in quality of life, and reduced mortality), reduced days of
work missed due to illnesses related to poor indoor environmental quality, and lower
spending on health care due to these types of illnesses.
We have collected the estimates available from the literature which has attempted to
quantify health effects from specific energy efficiency renovations. We have used studies
that have stated both the costs of the renovations, and the value of the health improvements.
Based on primarily four available studies we calculate cost-benefit ratios by comparing
the cost of implementing the programmes with the estimated health benefits the
improvements give rise to. The results from these studies are stated in Table A.20.
66 Barnard et al (2011), page 11.
67 Barnard et al (2011), page 11.
68 See e.g. IEA (2012), and REHVA (2006)
69 See e.g. Slotsholm (2012), which find that Danish GDP may increase by €173 million due to better air quality in primary
schools.
65