Operationalising EPBD requirements by smartening up Energy Performance Certificates

Keywords: EPBD recast, Energy Performance Certificates (EPC), Smart Readiness Indicator (SRI), Building Automation and Control Systems (BACS), SmarterEPC, energy flexibility, HVAC practitioners.

The revised EPBD demands smarter buildings to achieve climate neutrality. The LIFE-funded SmarterEPC project delivers integrated, practitioner-ready workflows combining Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs) and the Smart Readiness Indicator (SRI), empowering building professionals to operationalise these European frameworks efficiently.

Moving Beyond Traditional Energy Performance Certificates

The 2024 revision of the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD) introduces a series of transformative changes designed to align the European building sector with 2050 climate neutrality targets. Historically, Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs) have focused heavily on static parameters, such as asset ratings, insulation quality, and nominal heating and cooling efficiencies.

However, modern building decarbonisation requires dynamic interaction with the energy grid. Building Automation and Control Systems (BACS) and other smart technical building systems play a vital role in optimizing energy use in real-time, empowering end-users, and unlocking energy flexibility.

A New EU Instrument: The Smart Readiness Indicator

To capture this potential, the EU introduced the Smart Readiness Indicator (SRI)[1] to complement traditional EPCs. This instrument measures a building’s ability to use smart technologies and assesses their capability to perform 3 key functionalities (Figure 1):

·         Optimise energy efficiency and overall in-use performance

·         Adapt their operation to the needs of the occupant

·         Adapt to signals from the grid (energy flexibility)

Figure 1. The three key functionalities assessed by the SRI.

The methodology for calculating the SRI is based on the assessment of smart-ready services that the building has or could use ("service catalogue"). These services are grouped into nine technical domains (Figure 2). The SRI calculation considers various functionality levels for each smart-ready service, and weighting factors allow aggregating the evaluation of all services into one single score, expressed as a percentage from 0% to 100%. For instance, the presence and degree of smartness of thermostats (centralised, per zone, with occupancy detection…) allow increasing the SRI score with an impact on energy efficiency (key functionality 1), as well as comfort, convenience and health of the occupants (key functionality 2). Similarly, the degree of smartness of local electricity generation systems (e.g., PV systems) with the optimisation of self-consumption increases the SRI score with an impact on energy flexibility and storage (key functionality 3).

Figure 2. The nine technical domains covered by the SRI.

As most of these technical domains are also addressed by EPCs, the core challenge for practitioners today is avoiding administrative duplication while deploying these interconnected instruments on the ground.

The SmarterEPC mission: eliminating duplication

Co-funded by the LIFE programme, the SmarterEPC project[2] directly assists Member States, building professionals, and market actors in navigating this new regulatory landscape. Rather than treating energy performance and smart readiness assessments as isolated tasks, SmarterEPC establishes integrated, EN ISO 52000-aligned and EPBD-compliant processes, based on three main building blocks (Figure 3):

·         A standardized joint EPC & SRI onsite audit procedure, which frames data collection based on existing standards.

·         The SmarterEPC Hub, including a smart data collection IT interface, designed to read and map variables, preparing the data to be used by EPC and SRI tools, for the calculation of energy performance and smart readiness assessments, respectively.

·         A joint EPC & SRI certificate template, with EBPD-compliant contents, integrating the outcomes of both assessments.

Figure 3. The SmarterEPC user journey.

Standardized joint EPC & SRI onsite Audit procedure: it facilitates the on-site data collection and maximise efficiency, not only for EPC generation and SR assessment of smart control functionalities, but also for the development of Renovation Passports (another instrument introduced by the EPBD) and technical system inspections. It leads to reduced duplication, increased affordability, and enhanced consistency between disclosure instruments. Consisting of detailed guidance and procedure to conduct on-site work, and information on the data to be collected and how to find them, it will be the basis for future CEN standardisation.

The SmarterEPC Hub: it enables the first integrated workflow for assessing both building smartness and energy performance. Central digital tool for smart data collection, it unlocks the first joint EPC and SRI certification workflow. The SmarterEPC Hub connects to existing EPC and SRI calculation tools.

Joint EPC & SRI certificate template: it combines a building's energy performance (EPC) and smart readiness (SRI) into a single, EPBD-aligned and user-friendly certificate[3]. It provides a visualisation of both energy efficiency and smart capabilities, supporting better-informed renovation and investment decisions.

Figure 4. The SmarterEPC joint EPC and SRI certificate.

Perspectives and challenges for the integration of EPCs and the SRI

The mandatory application of the SRI to non-residential buildings with a high energy demand (effective rated output for HVAC systems over 290 kW) is contemplated by the EPBD, while the scheme should remain optional for other buildings. As foreseen by the directive, a report is currently being drafted by the European Commission on the basis of the available results of national test phases of the SRI implementation conducted by Member States and other relevant projects (such as SmarterEPC). According to the EPBD, taking into account the outcome of that Commission report, several regulations should be adopted at the EU level to turn the SRI into an effective, regulatory instrument. The EPBD also mentions the intention to clarify the complementary relation of the scheme to the EPCs.

During the period from 2022 to 2026, 16 Member States tested the SRI[4], in some cases with the support of projects co-funded by the LIFE programme. These tests proved the interest of the sector in the instrument, and more generally in the benefits obtained from smart building technologies.

They also unveiled some challenges, in particular concerning the interrelation between the SRI and EPCs. These include:

·         The apparent overlap between EPCs and the energy efficiency functionality of the SRI. Conceptually, each instrument assesses different aspects of energy efficiency: for instance, EPCs assess the intrinsic energy and environmental performance of a heat generator, while the SRI assesses the control capabilities of the same heat generator, irrespective of its intrinsic performance. However, from the perspective of a building owner or other non-expert stakeholder, the fact that both instruments address energy efficiency and can deliver seemingly inconsistent results, might be a source of confusion. Pedagogy will be needed to address this issue.

·         The extent to which both instruments should run independently, or should be integrated (as promoted by SmarterEPC). The integration of both instruments has obvious advantages, in terms of implementation costs and communication with building owners. A more technical advantage is that the energy consumption indicated in the EPC can be an input parameter in the SRI calculation, replacing default weighting factors used in the methodology. But it also raises some challenges. For instance, EPC assessors are trained and certified according to certain competencies they must have; including the SRI in their scope would lead to profoundly revising the competence requirements in place in each country.

·         The need for integrated, consistent building upgrade packages. EPCs include recommendations for energy renovations, possibly in connection with Renovation Passports. SRI assessments would also go with recommendations on how to improve the SRI score. Counter-intuitively, some improvements from the EPC’s point of view can have a negative impact on the SRI score. For instance, installing solar panels can be recommended to improve the EPC class, but if these solar panels have no smart capabilities, their presence will lead to a lower SRI score. These interactions should be clearly mapped, and integrated renovation packages should be developed to improve both energy performance and smart readiness in a cost-effective manner.

·         The different nature of both instruments, as EPC classes quantify energy performance in kWh/sqm/year while the SRI assesses the availability of smart-ready services without quantifying their impact. Some stakeholders promote the idea of making the SRI more quantitative, meaning that instead of delivering a score expressed as a percentage, it would deliver values corresponding to energy savings, energy flexibility, etc. Interestingly, some methodologies and tools exist in this regard, for instance in France with the GOFLEX platform. It provides a letter (A to D) that indicates the building’s control class, an estimate of the site’s absolute load shedding capacity (kW) and a relative estimate (%) reflecting the ratio between the load shedding capacity and contracted power. [5]

Conclusions

At present, significant efforts are still needed to roll out the SRI at a large scale. For instance, the development of buildings’ onsite audit procedures, the training, qualification and certification of building auditors, the accreditation of SRI calculation tools, and the format of SRI certificates are some of the aspects to be addressed in priority. SmarterEPC provides guidance in this perspective with its roadmap “Fit for 290!”.[6]

However, the necessary steps to develop the SRI ecosystem should use what is already in place in each country in terms of buildings’ performance assessment. The SRI should be implemented in synergy with energy performance assessment procedures, tools and certificate issuance, ultimately aiming to support property owners and managers on their way to optimal operational conditions of their buildings.

The ball is now in the court of the European Commission and the Member States, which are currently determining the most effective approach for implementing the SRI across Europe. SmarterEPC has delivered three prospective scenarios reflecting different levels of policy ambition, enforcement, and digital integration. Each scenario projects potential trajectories for EPC and SRI implementation from 2025 to 2040, highlighting the policy actions and innovations required to enhance coverage, compliance, and impact. [7]

·         “Business as Usual” scenario: Only minimal new measures are introduced beyond current practices, leading to a continuation of the status quo: slow incremental progress in EPC coverage and almost negligible adoption of SRI, constrained by weak enforcement and lack of strong new incentives or digital integration.

·         “Policy Acceleration” scenario: Full and effective transposition of the EPBD, coupled with robust enforcement measures. This scenario stops short of full digital transformation, but it lays the groundwork (via open data and standardised schemes) for a more integrated future.

·         “Digital and Integrated Future Actions”: A high-ambition world where policy, market, and technology trends converge to produce widespread uptake of EPCs and SRIs, facilitated by advanced digital infrastructure. This scenario paints a picture of an EU building stock where energy performance and smart capability information is readily available for virtually every building, thereby supporting not only regulatory compliance but also smarter decision-making in real estate and renovation markets.

References