Experimental evaluation of calculated energy savings in schools


A lot of studies focus on IAQ in classrooms and energy retrofit of schools in order to increase the pupils’ performance and reduce energy consumption. However, there are limited number of studies that compare the calculated (as part of energy audits) and actual energy savings, discussing such a difference in order to give the recommendation for the future renovation projects. Long-term field data were collected over eight heating seasons from four schools organized into two groups characterized by different range of modernization activities. The group A includes two schools where besides the thermal modernization of building envelopes, the central heating installation was modernized and hydraulic balanced. The group B also comprises two schools where only the thermal retrofit of building envelopes took place, but the heating installation was not modernized, nor hydraulic balanced. The calculated level of energy saving was not covered in 18.1% and 20.3% in the case of schools from group A and in 47.2% and 41.1% in the case of schools from group B, respectively. The results may be of interest for the investors, engineers and policy makers who intend to minimize the difference between the planned and real energy savings as well as the payback time of modernization activities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7


  1. 1.

    Perez-Lombard L, Ortiz J, Pout C. A review on buildings energy consumption information. Energy Build. 2008;40:394–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Wang JC. A study on the energy performance of school buildings in Taiwan. Energy Build. 2016;133:810–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    de Dear R, Kim J, Candido C, Deuble M. Adaptive thermal comfort in Australian school classrooms. Build Res Inf. 2015;43:383–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Haddad S, Osmond P, King S. Revisiting thermal comfort models in Iranian classrooms during the warm season. Build Res Inf. 2017;45:457–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Wargocki P, Wyon DP. The effects of moderately raised classroom temperatures and classroom ventilation rate on the performance of schoolwork by children. HVAC&R. 2007;13:193–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Wargocki P, Wyon DP. Providing better thermal and air quality conditions in school classrooms would be cost-effective. Build Environ. 2013;59:581–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Clements-Croome DJ, Awbi HB, Bako-Biro Z, Kochhar N, Williams M. Ventilation rates in schools. Build Environ. 2008;43:362–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Haverinen-Shaughnessy U, Moschandreas DJ, Shaughnessy RJ. Association between substandard classroom ventilation rates and students’ academic achievement. Indoor Air. 2011;21:121–31.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Gao J, Wargocki P, Wang Y. Ventilation system type, classroom environmental quality and pupils’ perceptions and symptoms. Build Environ. 2014;75:46–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Toftum J, Kjeldsen BU, Wargocki P, Menå HR, Hansen EMN, Clausen G. Association between classroom ventilation mode and learning outcome in Danish schools. Build Environ. 2015;92:494–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Pivac N, Nižetić S, Zanki V. Occupant behavior and thermal comfort field analysis in typical educational research institution: a case study. Thermal Sci. 2018;22:S785–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Pereira LD, Raimondo D, Corgnati SP, da Silva MG. Energy consumption in schools—a review paper. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2014;40:911–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Raatikainen M, Skön JP, Leiviskä K, Kolehmainen M. Intelligent analysis of energy consumption in school buildings. Appl Energy. 2016;165:416–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    de Santoli L, Fraticelli F, Fornari F, Calice C. Energy performance assessment and a retrofit strategies in public school buildings in Rome. Energy Build. 2014;68:196–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Salvalai G, Malighetti LE, Luchini L, Girola S. Analysis of different energy conservation strategies on existing school buildings in a Pre-Alpine Region. Energy Build. 2017;145:92–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Gaitani N, Lehmann C, Santamouris M, Mihalakakou G, Patargias P. Using principal component and cluster analysis in the heating evaluation of the school building sector. Appl Energy. 2010;87:2079–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Petcharat S, Chungpaibulpatana S, Rakkwamsuk P. Assessment of potential energy saving using cluster analysis: a case study of lighting systems in buildings. Energy Build. 2012;52:145–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Heidarinejad M, Dahlhausen M, McMahon S, Pyke C, Srebric J. Cluster analysis of simulated energy use for LEED certified U.S. office buildings. Energy Build. 2014;85:86–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Tahsildoost M, Zomorodian ZS. Energy retrofit techniques: an experimental study of two typical school buildings in Tehran. Energy Build. 2015;104:65–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Zinzi M, Agnoli S, Battistini G, Bernabini G. Deep energy retrofit of the T. M. Plauto School in Italy—a five years experience. Energy Build. 2016;126:239–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Fennell P, Ruyssevelt P, Smith AZP. Financial viability of school retrofit projects for clients and ESCOs. Build Res Inf. 2016;44:889–906.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Nižetić S, Papadopoulos AM. Concept of building evaluation methodology for gap estimation between designed and achieved energy savings. Procedia Environ Sci. 2017;38:538–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Krawczyk DA. Theoretical and real effect of the school’s thermal modernization—a case study. Energy Build. 2014;81:30–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Johnston D, Miles-Shenton D, Farmer D. Quantifying the domestic building fabric ‘performance gap’. Build Serv Eng Res Technol. 2015;36:614–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Loucari C, Taylor J, Raslan R, Oikonomou E, Mavrogianni A. Retrofit solutions for solid wall dwellings in England: the impact of uncertainty upon the energy performance gap. Build Serv Eng Res Technol. 2016;37:614–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Imam S, Coley DA, Walker I. The building performance gap: are modellers literate? Build Serv Eng Res Technol. 2017;38:351–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    EN ISO 6946: 2017 Building components and building elements—thermal resistance and thermal transmittance—calculation method.

  28. 28.

    EN 12831-1: 2017 Energy performance of buildings. Method for calculation of the design heat load. Space heating load.

  29. 29.

    EN ISO 13790: 2008 Energy performance of buildings—calculation of energy use for space heating and cooling.

  30. 30.

    Regulation of Minister of Infrastructure and Development of 27th February, 2015 on the methodology for determining the energy performance of a building or part of a building, and energy performance certificates. (in polish).

Download references


This study was supported by research Project, financed by the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education.

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tomasz Cholewa.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cholewa, T., Życzyńska, A. Experimental evaluation of calculated energy savings in schools. J Therm Anal Calorim 141, 213–220 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-019-09230-4

Download citation


  • Building energy retrofit
  • Energy audit
  • Heating
  • Energy savings
  • Energy efficiency
  • School