Page 1 of 8

European Journal of Applied Sciences – Vol. 11, No. 6

Publication Date: December 25, 2023

DOI:10.14738/aivp.116.15851

Attallah, S. & Shayesteh, A. (2023). Net Zero Energy Buildings and the cost per sf. European Journal of Applied Sciences, Vol -

11(6). 73-80.

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

Net Zero Energy Buildings and the cost per sf

Sherif Attallah

Department of Construction Management & Interior

Design, Ball State University, Muncie, IN

Alireza Shayesteh

School of Landscape Architecture, Ball State University,

Muncie, IN, United States

ABSTRACT

Zero energy buildings are created and constructed to use the least amount of energy

feasible [1]. These structures can produce enough energy to meet or surpass their

operating needs when a renewable energy source is added to them [1]. Most

modern buildings consume a lot of energy to run the lights, heat the water, chill the

air, and power personal electronics [2]. The large energy load will not be greatly

mitigated by adding solar systems. However, there are other structures that achieve

balance or even tilt the scales in the opposite direction. These are referred to as

zero energy structures. The reductions in energy use and carbon footprint must be

adjusted to account for real systems, such as the inhabitants and the local climate

before renovations may be advised on a continental scale [3]. According to Delavar

and Sahebi Energy is an essential resource for the economic growth of today's

businesses [4]. Residential and commercial buildings must utilize a significant

amount of energy to provide the services required. The total amount of energy

consumed in this industry has been constantly increasing. Due to the large

greenhouse gas emissions that arise, effective building management and energy

conservation have become top priorities for the energy and environmental sectors

all over the world. In this direction, net-zero energy buildings (NZEB) are a very

effective way to minimize energy consumption and alleviate environmental

impacts in buildings.

Keywords: net-zero energy, building performance, sustainable development, cost per

sqft, sustainable energy source.

INTRODUCTION

Global temperatures and carbon emissions have increased in the twenty-first century,

increasing the likelihood of environmental catastrophes. Energy management systems are

receiving more attention as a means of lowering greenhouse gas emissions because of the

global climate change challenge and growing environmental consciousness. The globe is

working to achieve the Millennium Sustainability Goals, which can help the planet get back to

how it normally is. In response to the anthropogenic issues, several companies that influence

the built environment have stepped up their efforts to prioritize sustainability. According to the

study done by Hakim et al building energy innovation is necessary because, as is commonly

noted in the literature, buildings in the United States use 40% of the country's primary energy

[5]. Therefore, designing buildings with energy efficiency in mind is essential to reducing the

Page 2 of 8

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom 74

European Journal of Applied Sciences (EJAS) Vol. 11, Issue 6, December-2023

global carbon footprint and achieving sustainability goals. This includes using renewable

energy sources, implementing energy-efficient designs, and investing in energy-efficient

technology. Additionally, encouraging sustainable practices such as recycling, using natural

lighting, and utilizing green materials can also contribute to more sustainable building

practices.

A broad agreement on precise definitions of these buildings must be obtained for the NZE

concepts to take off in the market. The development of an effective design and control strategy

for NZE buildings would undoubtedly benefit from this agreement, which is also required for

assessing energy performance [6] [7]. This agreement must take into account the differences

between various types of buildings, climate and geographical conditions. It should also consider

the various materials used in the construction of the building and the impact of these materials

on its energy efficiency. Moreover, the agreement should cover the latest technologies to ensure

that the buildings are up-to-date and energy efficient. Lu et al. (2015) found that there is still

no uniform framework to define NZE buildings in the literature, and NZE is not a globally

accepted concept [7]. Research by Deng et al. titled "How to evaluate the performance of net

zero energy buildings" suggests that the definitions of NZE buildings should be clarified to

facilitate evaluation. There is no single standard expression for NZE buildings that is accepted

by the research community at the moment. Therefore, there is a need to develop a uniform

framework to define NZE buildings before any meaningful performance assessment can be

conducted. This framework should be based on consensus from the research community and

should be adapted to different climates and contexts. Therefore, the study stressed how crucial

it is to establish a framework that considers variables like border, metrics, climate, energy

sources, etc. Their research revealed that, within the established framework, individual

participants might define the definition's specifics. Numerous terms have been used

synonymously to describe this subject, including Zero Energy Building (ZEB), Net Zero Energy

Building (NZEB), Zero Net Energy (ZNE), Energy Neutral, and Energy Self Sufficient. The name

NZE building is used throughout the study to maintain a uniform vocabulary.

The U.S. Department of Energy's paper "A Common Definition for Zero Energy Buildings"

provides the following definition of NZE buildings as a whole: A "net zero energy building" is

one that is "energy efficient and whose real annual delivered energy, on a source energy basis,

is less than or equal to the on-site renewable exported energy" [9]. According to the DOE report,

on-site renewable energy systems are often located within the property boundary. It is

explained in the paper that a building does not meet these criteria for a NZE building if

renewable energy certificates (RECs) are used to offset the entire actual annual energy

consumption. The Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) are tradable securities that can be

purchased to offset carbon dioxide emissions produced elsewhere. RECs may be purchased

voluntarily by buildings to increase their use of renewable energy. Leadership in Energy and

Environmental Design (LEED) offers points for the use of RECs in their scoring system.

Cost per square foot (sf) is an important factor to consider when evaluating NZE viability. There

has traditionally been a higher upfront cost associated with the construction of green or

sustainable structures. However, with advancements in technology and an increased demand

for energy-efficient buildings, the cost per square foot for NZEs has steadily decreased. The cost

per sf for NZEs can vary depending on several factors, including the location, size, design, and

Page 3 of 8

75

Attallah, S. & Shayesteh, A. (2023). Net Zero Energy Buildings and the cost per sf. European Journal of Applied Sciences, Vol - 11(6). 73-80.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/aivp.116.15851

the technologies used. NZEs are generally more expensive to construct per square foot than

conventional buildings. There are additional costs associated with implementing energy- efficient features such as solar panels, high-performance insulation, energy-efficient HVAC

systems, and advanced lighting controls. The government and organizations have introduced a

variety of financial incentives and programs in order to further encourage the construction of

NZEs. By implementing these initiatives, builders and developers will be able to offset the

higher upfront costs of NZEs and make them more financially attractive. Examples of such

incentives include tax credits, grants, low-interest loans, and utility rebates.

LITERATURE SURVEY

Main Criteria for Net Zero Buildings

A handful of new structures have attained net zero energy. It has also been done in existing

buildings, albeit it is more difficult. The fact that massing, orientation, site design, and systems

are predefined and largely fixed distinguishes achieving net zero energy in an existing building

from doing so. Additionally, facility managers and occupants in older buildings may need to

adjust their operating expectations and usage patterns. It is important to not undervalue the

work necessary to alter tenant expectations and behavior, as well as their potential effects.

According to Carmichael et al. the likelihood of achieving net zero energy is highest in [10]:

Low-rise Buildings (one- or two-story):

Due to the restricted roof space for PV and the utilization of elevators, achieving net zero energy

in buildings with more than two stories becomes exponentially more challenging.

Moderate Climate Zones:

Severely humid regions, like Florida or the southern portions of Mississippi, as well as

extremely chilly regions, like North Dakota and the tip of Maine, make it more difficult to reach

net zero energy.

Buildings such as Warehouses:

loads (i.e., appliances, office equipment, computers). The energy sector is now dealing with a

few issues that are likely to get worse soon [4]. According to the International Energy Agency

(IEA), current energy sector behavior and carbon emissions have raised serious issues with the

environment, energy security, and economic growth [11]. Buildings contribute significantly to

global energy use and warming due to their long lifespans and greenhouse gas emissions,

necessitating appropriate interventions in this sector. A decrease in the environmental impacts

of buildings can have a significant positive impact on the environment, but there are few

effective ways to achieve this reduction. About 30% of CO2 emissions are attributed to building

energy use, whereas only 6% of all pollutants are attributed to household fuel consumption.

Building retrofitting and the deployment of effective renewable energy sources can lower

building energy demand, greenhouse gas emissions, and associated investment costs. Buildings

that use insulated materials store more energy than usual, so managing the in-and-out airflows

and insulation of the windows, walls, and ceilings to reduce energy consumption demand can

boost heat efficiency and comfort. On the other side, employing the right lighting, heating,

cooling, hot water, and energy systems and equipment in buildings can also lower the demand

for energy in the future. By reducing maintenance costs, gas emissions, increasing job

Page 4 of 8

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom 76

European Journal of Applied Sciences (EJAS) Vol. 11, Issue 6, December-2023

opportunities, and improving health, building upgrading can increase energy efficiency.

Therefore, a sustainable future can be achieved by developing technology, changing, and

storing thermal pumps, merging heat-power systems, and utilizing renewable energy sources

with solar, wind, geothermal, and biomass technologies. Due to the high cost of these facilities,

it is important to properly balance the heat load, environmental performance, and expenses.

The life cycle cost (LCC), a benchmark that totals all building expenditures over a certain period,

can be used to determine the financial advantages of using energy resources during a

structure's usable lifespan. In contrast, the integrity of buildings can be thought of as a multi- criteria decision-making dilemma where the best goals can be the costs, the environment, and

other factors.

Ala and Reda study shows that in recent years, new concepts, and applications of Net- Zero/Positive-Energy Buildings and Districts (NZPEBD) have emerged because of the crucial

goal of decarbonizing towns and cities [12]. The NZPEBD research spans all relevant areas of

energy in buildings and communities, from the fundamental definition of the concept which

includes the definitions of the concept's boundary and the different kinds of energy credits to

the features of the building envelope, the components and integration of on-site renewable

energy systems, interactions with external grids, performance control and optimization, etc., as

well as social and economic issues.

Various social, political, and economic realms must be operationalized to achieve net zero [13].

There are many moral judgments, social concerns, political interests, fairness dimensions,

economic considerations, and technological transitions that must be navigated, as well as

several political, economic, legal, and behavioral pitfalls that could prevent the successful

implementation of net zero.

Considering Shanti and Torecellini paper, “A classification system based on renewable energy

supply options” building is classified as follow [14]:

Classification

Buildings Classified as NZE- A:

NZE: Energy is produced and consumed by a building by combining energy efficiency and re- gathered from inside the building's footprint. Due to their utilization of local RE resources,

these structures can be considered sites. Reaching a source or emissions NZE position may be

challenging if the source and emissions multipliers for a NZE: A are high during periods of utility

energy demand but low during periods when the NZE is exporting to the grid. Depending on

the local net metering regulations, it could be challenging to qualify as a cost NZE.

Buildings Classified as NZE- B:

Energy is produced and used by NZEB: B buildings through a combination of energy efficiency,

RE produced within the footprint, and RE produced on the site. Due to their utilization of local

RE resources, these structures can be considered sites. Reaching a source or emissions NZEB

position may be challenging if a NZEB: B's source and emissions multipliers are high when the

NZEB is consuming utility energy but low when it is exporting to the grid. Depending on the

local net metering regulations, it could be challenging to qualify as a cost NZEB.

Page 5 of 8

77

Attallah, S. & Shayesteh, A. (2023). Net Zero Energy Buildings and the cost per sf. European Journal of Applied Sciences, Vol - 11(6). 73-80.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/aivp.116.15851

Buildings Classified as NZE- C:

As much as is practical, NZE:C buildings apply the RE techniques mentioned for NZE: A and/or

NZE: B buildings. Additionally, these structures make use of Option 3, which involves bringing

on-site renewable resources from outside the building. They might be considered NZEs for

sites, sources, and emissions since they make use of renewable resources. If carbon-neutral

renewables are employed, like wood chips, or if the source and carbon multipliers are not

favorable, it may be challenging to achieve a NZE:C source and emission situation. When a

utility has low source and carbon impacts and a NZE imports electricity when the utility has

high source and carbon impacts, this can happen. Because renewable resources must be

acquired and transported on site, NZE:C buildings often do not attain a cost NZE position. It

would be extremely difficult to recover these costs through any utility compensation for RE

generation.

Buildings Classified as NZE- D:

The energy strategies for NZE: A, NZE: B, and/or NZE:C buildings are used in NZE:D structures.

The greatest amount of on-site renewable methods is utilized. These structures also employ

Option 4, which involves buying certified off-site RE from certified sources, such as utility-scale

wind and RECs. Off-site options should be investigated, if necessary, after all cost-effective

efficiency and on-site RE measures have been completely utilized. If NZEB:D buildings purchase

enough RE and have favorable source and emissions factors, they may be eligible to become

source and emissions NZEs. They won't be eligible for site- and cost-based NZEs.

RESULT & DISCUSSION

History of this Approach to Building

In the past, climate ambition has either been expressed as a stable level of atmospheric

concentration or as an emissions reduction objective expressed as a percentage. Today, climate

ambition is most often defined as a precise deadline for achieving net-zero emissions, usually

related to the Paris Agreement's peak temperature goals. Net-zero targets have already been

reached for about two-thirds of world emissions and a somewhat more significant percentage

of global gross domestic product [15].

The idea of net zero is fundamentally scientific. Physics suggests that a finite budget of carbon

dioxide and other greenhouse gases are permitted into the atmosphere if the goal is to keep the

rise in world average temperatures within specific bounds. Any additional release must be

offset by removal into sinks after this budget has been reached.

Although a societal decision, the tolerable temperature rise is supported by climate science.

197 nations have committed to keeping global warming far below 2 °C and working to keep it

at 1.5 °C as part of the Paris Agreement. With a 50% chance of success, the 1.5 °C objectives can

be reached with a carbon budget of 400–800 GtCO2. To stay under this carbon budget, CO2

emissions must be peaked by 2030 and reach net zero by about 2050 [15].

Examples and Most Involved Countries

The eagerness with which an increasing number of nations, subnational institutions, and

individual organizations have made net-zero commitments attests to the narrative's capacity

to unite and inspire. We should support these pledges. However, there is a worry that these

Page 6 of 8

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom 78

European Journal of Applied Sciences (EJAS) Vol. 11, Issue 6, December-2023

frequently voluntary promises may not be consistent with global net zero or aggressive climate

action since they permit too much choice in the design of net-zero routes. Therefore, actionable

commitments must be underpinned by a level of ambition that is in line with the Paris

Agreement. Additionally, it is essential to ensure that the commitments are monitored and

enforced in order to ensure they are delivered upon. Finally, there needs to be a transparent

system that measures the progress of these commitments and reviews them regularly.

Currently, there are insufficient procedures for governance, accountability, and reporting.

Often, long-term goals are not sufficiently supported by immediate activity. Many organizations

are vague about the use of carbon offsets in place of reducing their own emissions and have not

yet laid out specific plans to fulfill their commitments. The social and environmental integrity

of some of these offsets is under doubt. Because of this, some activists claim that these

commitments are merely "greenwashing" [15] Companies may be paying for carbon offsets

instead of actually reducing their emissions, which does not solve the underlying problem. This

practice can lead to a false sense that the company is doing something to fight climate change,

when in reality, it is only creating a Band-Aid solution.

In addition to the approximately 280 NZE emerging buildings that have been built for and

intended for net zero status but have not yet proven achievement of that aim, there are more

than 50 net zero energy (NZE) verified buildings in the United States. Simply put, an NZE

building uses no more energy than can be generated on-site through renewable sources over

the course of a year [5]. It is not surprising to observe a sharp rise in the number of NZE

buildings, given improvements in design, building methods, and technology. Another influence

is the growing number of US States and local governments requiring net zero buildings. The

number of confirmed and growing NZE buildings in the United States has tripled since 2012,

according to the New Building Institute (NBI).

The Cost Associated with the Net Zero Buildings

NZEs aim to reduce the amount of energy used from fossil fuels. With such a significant

potential, it seems pointless not to minimize the energy demand first. To reduce on-site energy

consumption, buildings should apply techniques in the building design, such as B.: daylighting,

insulation, passive solar heating, and natural ventilation, to name a few- ones. It was also

pointed out that energy efficiency measures such as high-performance windows, compact

fluorescent lights, water-cooled condenser air conditioning, and a highly insulated roof have a

combined payback period of slightly less than 15 years. This means that the initial investment

that is required for these energy-efficient measures will be returned through energy savings

within a relatively short period of time. Moreover, these measures can help to reduce carbon

emissions and improve air quality.

With current urbanization trends showing nearly 83% of Americans live in urban areas, the

need for energy-efficient homes that meet the growing density of cities explains the need for

multifamily housing across the country. The residential sector accounts for 21% of total energy

use in the United States. Efficiently built homes and apartments not only reduce greenhouse

gas emissions by using less energy but also provide tangible savings in energy costs that

building owners or tenants can appreciate. These energy savings can be achieved through

building design, energy efficient appliances, and smart energy management systems. Moreover,

Page 7 of 8

79

Attallah, S. & Shayesteh, A. (2023). Net Zero Energy Buildings and the cost per sf. European Journal of Applied Sciences, Vol - 11(6). 73-80.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/aivp.116.15851

the cost of these energy efficient solutions can be offset by incentives from the government or

other organizations. These incentives can also make energy efficient solutions more attractive

to prospective tenants and buyers, which can help increase the value of the property. As a

result, energy efficient homes and apartments can be beneficial for both the environment and

the building owners or tenants.

According to the McKittrick and Gregor study, the analyzed EEMs (energy efficiency measures)

helped them reduce the buildings' total energy consumption with their baselines and models

[16]. Considering their model, which included different climate zones and types of buildings,

2,3,4 stories of residential buildings, they came up with the total building cost estimates. It is

estimated that for 2-story buildings, the cost/sqft is $173.55, contributing to $2,429,700 for the

total cost. For 3-story buildings, the cost/sqft is $165.84 with $3,482,550 and for 4-story

buildings is $183.48 with a total cost of $5,137,440. Overall, the cost is significantly higher for

higher stories, with a difference of $2,707,740 between the costs of 2 and 4 stories. These

estimates can help developers to plan their projects accordingly. It is important to consider

other factors such as labor costs, materials, and other expenses before starting a project.

Developers should also consider the potential return on investment of the project and the

expected duration of the project. Lastly, the quality of the construction should also be

considered.

References

[1] “Zero Energy Buildings Resource Hub.” Energy.gov, www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/zero energy- buildings-resource-hub

[2] “About Zero Energy Buildings.” Energy.gov, www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/about-zero-energy- buildings.

[3] Vinay, M.L. Real world energy and carbon costs of net-zero energy buildings. Commun Eng 1, 8 (2022).

https://doi.org/10.1038/s44172-022-00009-4

[4] Delavar, Hamed, and Hadi Sahebi. “A sustainable mathematical model for design of net zero energy

buildings.” Heliyon vol. 6,1 e03190. 15 Jan. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon. 2020.e03190

[5] Hakim, Hamed & Asutosh, Ashish & Razkenari, Mohamad & Fenner, Andriel Evandro & Kibert, Charles.

(2018). A Study of Net Zero Energy Buildings in the U.S.: Evaluating Key Elements.

10.1061/9780784481301.047.

[6] IEA, S. Task 40/EBC Annex 52, Towards Net Zero Energy Solar Buildings, IEA SHC Task 40 and ECBCS

Annex 52.

[7] Lu, Y., Wang, S., & Shan, K. (2015). Review: Design optimization and optimal control of grid-connected and

standalone nearly/net zero energy buildings. Applied Energy, 155463-477. doi:

10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.06.007

[8] Deng, S., Wang, R., & Dai, Y. (2014). Review: How to evaluate performance of net zero energy building-A

literature research. Energy, 711-16. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2014.05.007

[9] Peterson, K., Torcellini, P., Grant, R., Taylor, C., Punjabi, S., & Diamond, R. (2015). Common definition for

zero energy buildings. US Department of Energy

Page 8 of 8

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom 80

European Journal of Applied Sciences (EJAS) Vol. 11, Issue 6, December-2023

[10] Carmichael, Cara, and Katrina Managan. "Reinventing existing Buildings: eight steps to net ZeRo eneRgy."

Institute for Building Efficiency an Initiative of Johnson Controls: Milwaukee, WI, USA (2013).

[11] Paul Waide, Daniele Gerundino, International standards to develop and promote energy efficiency and

renewable energy sources. Prepared for the G8 Plan of Action. IEA Information Paper, 2007, p. 2011.

Retrieved March 28.

[12] Hasan, Ala, and Francesco Reda. 2022. "Special Issue “Net-Zero/Positive Energy Buildings and Districts”"

Buildings 12, no. 3: 382. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12030382

[13] Fankhauser, S., Smith, S.M., Allen, M. et al. The meaning of net zero and how to get it right. Nat. Clim. Chang.

12, 15–21 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01245-w

[14] Pless, Shanti, and Paul Torcellini. Net-zero energy buildings: A classification system based on renewable

energy supply options. No. NREL/TP-550-44586. National Renewable Energy Lab. (NREL), Golden, CO

(United States), 2010.

[15] Fankhauser, S., Smith, S.M., Allen, M. et al. The meaning of net zero and how to get it right. Nat. Clim. Chang.

12, 15–21 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01245-w

[16] McKittrick, Adam R., and Gregor P. Henze. "Cost analysis of annual and monthly Net zero energy

performance for Multifamily buildings in the United States." Journal of Architectural Engineering 27.

NREL/JA-5500-79217 (2021).