This report takes the Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) methodologies of nine different European countries across 65 tested buildings to investigate how the modelled energy consumption compares with those same buildings’ real, measured energy consumption. Each building is modelled with the local EPC methodology and compared with metered energy consumption, converting the EPC output to a parameter allowing this comparison where required.
The study demonstrates the challenges of comparing different methodologies with different metrics and frameworks, particularly across relatively small samples of buildings. However, the 65 case-study buildings do indicate how previously discussed differences in methodologies can be seen when those methodologies are applied to real buildings.
Using real energy consumption values as an effective target for those methodologies – and therefore calculating a Performance Gap for each building – is an approximation of “success” for those different approaches to generating an EPC. However, as discussed in the report, this Performance Gap should not be seen as an absolute measurement of EPC effectiveness, with EPCs not designed to account for meaningful occupancy behaviour in individual buildings. Therefore, conclusions must be guided by contextual data and further modelling results, as being explored in the crossCert project.