In the world of construction and energy efficiency, a persistent challenge has been the gap between the predicted performance of buildings and their actual energy use. This performance gap has left many stakeholders scratching their heads and questioning the value of building performance simulations. However, a new special collection of papers published in the journal *Buildings & Cities* (translated from English) sheds light on this issue and offers insights into how the industry can move forward.
The collection, guest-edited by Michael Donn of the School of Architecture at Victoria University of Wellington, focuses on the role of simulation in bridging the performance gap. Donn and his contributors delve into quality assurance measures, case studies, and user studies to understand how trust in performance calculations can be developed and maintained.
One of the key takeaways from the collection is that the performance gap arises from a fundamental misconception: that a model of reality can predict the future with absolute accuracy. As Donn explains, “People who produce simulation results need to explain to the users of the results why this gap exists.” This gap is not merely a result of poor training or unrealistic input values, although these factors do play a role. Even when these issues are addressed, the gap persists, highlighting the need for a more nuanced understanding of building performance simulation.
Critics of building performance simulation often point to the aphorism attributed to statistician George Box: “All models are wrong.” While this statement holds truth, Donn argues that it overlooks the significant value of models in guiding investment decisions. As Box himself noted, “It is inappropriate to be concerned about mice when there are tigers abroad.” In other words, while models may not be perfect, they are invaluable in helping stakeholders avoid costly mistakes.
The papers in this collection suggest that building performance simulation has the potential to provide detailed information that could help code officials quantify the risk of buildings performing differently than modeled. To achieve this, simulation experts need to be more engaged in defining and ensuring compliance with building energy performance codes.
The implications of this research for the energy sector are significant. By improving the reliability and effectiveness of building performance simulations, the industry can make more informed decisions about energy efficiency investments. This can lead to cost savings for building owners and operators, as well as reduced energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions.
As the construction industry continues to grapple with the performance gap, the insights from this special collection offer a path forward. By embracing a more nuanced understanding of building performance simulation and engaging more deeply with code officials, the industry can harness the power of models to drive better outcomes for all stakeholders. For those in the energy sector, this research underscores the importance of continued investment in building performance simulation and the need for ongoing dialogue between simulation experts and code officials.