ZEB Performance Report

ZEB Buildings:
Design vs Actual Primary Energy Analysis

A comparative analysis of design-stage energy calculations and post-occupancy measured performance, using publicly available data from the ZEB Demonstration Project by the Sustainable open Innovation Initiative (SII)

Last Updated: April 4, 2026

Buildings Analyzed
194 bldgs
ZEB-certified buildings
Avg. Design Reduction
54.5%
Excl. on-site generation
Avg. Actual Reduction
67.8%
Excl. on-site generation
Actual Exceeded Design
99.5%
193 / 194 buildings

Part 1

Overall Energy Reduction Analysis

Multi-faceted analysis of design primary energy reduction rates vs. actual performance across all 194 buildings.

1

Design vs Actual: Scatter by Building Use (Excl. On-Site Gen.)

Filter by building use type. Points above the 45° line indicate actual performance exceeded design estimates.

Building Use:
-
Shown
-
Design (Avg.)
-
Actual (Avg.)
-
Gap (pt)
Key Finding: 99.5% of buildings achieved actual reduction rates exceeding design values, with an average gap of +13.3 pt. Design-stage energy calculations tend to be conservative (on the safe side).
2

Design vs Actual: Scatter by Climate Zone (Excl. On-Site Gen.)

Filter by climate zone (1=coldest to 8=warmest) to analyze climate-related trends.

Climate Zone:
-
Shown
-
Design (Avg.)
-
Actual (Avg.)
-
Gap (pt)
Regional Trends: Actual performance exceeded design in all climate zones, with slightly larger gaps in warmer zones (Zones 6–8).
3

Distribution of Design–Actual Reduction Gap (Excl. On-Site Gen.)

Distribution of "Actual Reduction − Design Reduction". Positive values indicate actual exceeded design.

Distribution: Mean gap +13.3 pt, median +13.2 pt. Concentrated in the +10 to +20 pt range.
4

Reduction Rate by ZEB Rank

Reduction by design ZEB rank (excl. on-site gen.)

By Rank: Actual exceeded design across all ranks, from ZEB Oriented (39.9%→53.6%) to Nearly ZEB (60.6%→71.8%). ZEB Ready (162 bldgs) recorded the largest gap at +13.5 pt (55.6%→69.1%).
5

Reduction by Climate Zone (Excl. On-Site Gen.)

Design vs. actual by climate zone

6

Reduction by Floor Area (Excl. On-Site Gen.)

Comparison by building size

7

New vs Existing: Reduction (Excl. On-Site Gen.)

Overall reduction by construction type

Construction Type: New (117 bldgs) and existing/renovated (77 bldgs) have nearly identical design rates (54.4% vs 54.7%), but existing buildings achieved slightly higher actual reductions (69.2% vs 66.9%).
8

Reduction by Building Use (Excl. On-Site Gen.)

Design vs. actual energy reduction by building use (showing uses with 3+ buildings).

By Use: Actual exceeded design for all uses, with universities (+18.6 pt) and traditional inns (+16.8 pt) showing the largest gaps. Hotels had the smallest gap (+0.7 pt).
9

ZEB Rank Transition Matrix

Number of transitions from design to actual ZEB rank.

Design RankActual RankCountShareChange

Part 2

BEI Analysis by Equipment Category

Detailed analysis of energy efficiency performance (BEI) for HVAC, ventilation, lighting, hot water, elevators, and miscellaneous equipment.

10

Equipment Category: Design vs Actual Scatter

BEI values visualized as scatter plots. Points below the 45° line indicate actual BEI outperformed design.

-
Data Points
-
Design (Avg.)
-
Actual (Avg.)
-
Actual < Design
11

BEI Comparison by Equipment (Design vs Actual)

BEI = 1.0 is the baseline; lower values indicate higher efficiency. Toggle between mean and median.

Notable Trends: HVAC (design 0.50→actual 0.35) and hot water (1.00→0.52) showed significant outperformance. Ventilation was nearly equal between design and actual.
12

Energy Consumption by Equipment (Baseline / Design / Actual)

Side-by-side comparison of average primary energy consumption per category.

13

Miscellaneous Energy: Design vs Actual

Comparison of non-BEI energy consumption (office equipment, cooking, etc.) by building use.

2.75 MJ×10⁶
Design Avg.
1.57 MJ×10⁶
Actual Avg.
57.1%
Actual/Design Ratio
Miscellaneous Energy: Actual consumption was only 57% of design estimates, indicating lower-than-expected equipment usage.
14

New vs Existing: BEI by Equipment Category

Comparing design and actual BEI by equipment category for new construction (117) vs. existing/renovated (77) buildings.

By Construction × Equipment: HVAC BEI design is 0.50 for both types, but existing (0.33) slightly outperformed new (0.35). Ventilation improved for existing (0.44→0.37) but worsened for new (0.48→0.70). Hot water showed major improvement in existing (1.11→0.57).

Part 3

On-Site Energy Generation Analysis

Comparison of design vs. actual performance for solar PV and cogeneration systems.

15

Solar PV: Design vs Actual

Comparing design generation estimates vs. actual output for 118 buildings with solar PV. Toggle outlier visibility.

118 bldgs
Installed
0.44 MJ×10⁶
Design Avg.
0.50 MJ×10⁶
Actual Avg.
+14%
Outperformance

Generation: Design vs Actual

Avg. Generation by Building Use

Solar PV Results: Actual total generation of 60.3 MJ×10⁶ exceeded the design estimate of 52.4 MJ×10⁶ (+14%). Department stores and gymnasiums showed particularly high output.
16

Cogeneration: Design vs Actual

Energy savings by building use for 20 buildings with cogeneration systems.

20 bldgs
Installed
20.7 MJ×10⁶
Design Total
43.7 MJ×10⁶
Actual Total
+111%
Outperformance
Cogeneration Results: Actual energy savings were approximately 2.1× the design estimate. Hospitals and hotels with high thermal demand showed the greatest benefits.

Methodology and Notes

This analysis is based on data from 194 buildings in the ZEB Demonstration Project. Primary energy consumption is calculated from baseline values per energy conservation standards (PAL*/H25), design values via WEBPRO, and operational measurement data. Reduction rates are on an "excluding on-site generation" basis. BEI is the ratio of primary energy consumption per equipment category to the baseline (values below 1.0 indicate energy savings). Solar PV and cogeneration values are displayed as absolute values. "Miscellaneous" refers to non-BEI energy consumption such as office equipment, cooking, and servers. Construction types are classified as "New" (117 buildings) and "Existing/Renovated" (77 buildings).

Disclaimer

This report was independently compiled and analyzed based on data published by the Sustainable open Innovation Initiative (SII) for the ZEB Demonstration Project, and has not been officially created or endorsed by SII. The content is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute advice regarding specific building projects, equipment design, or investment decisions. While every effort has been made to ensure accuracy, errors may exist in the data processing and aggregation. The authors accept no liability for any damages arising from the use of information in this report. For energy performance evaluation of individual building projects, please consult qualified professionals and verify the original source data. Copyright of the underlying data belongs to the original data providers.