Durability of building envelope is important to new homes that are increasingly built with improved levels of airtightness. It is also important to weatherized homes such that energy savings from retrofit measures, such as air sealing, are persistent. We presented a comparison of air leakage measurements collected in November 2013 through March 2014, with two sets of prior data collected between 2001-2003 from 17 new homes located near Atlanta, GA, and 17 homes near Boise, ID that were weatherized in 2007-2008. The purpose of the comparison is to determine if there are changes to the airtightness of building envelopes over time. The air leakage increased in all but one of the new homes, with a mean increase of about 25%. The weatherized homes also showed an increase in the mean air leakage (12%). We performed a regression analysis to describe the relationship between prior and current measurements in terms of normalized leakage (NL). The best estimate of the aging factor predicts a 15% increase in NL over ten years. Further analysis using ResDB data (LBNL’s Residential Diagnostic Database) showed the expected changes in air leakage if aging were modeled. These results imply that we should examine the causes of increased leakage and methods to avoid them. This increase in leakage with time should be accounted for in long-term population-wide energy savings estimates, such as those used in ratings or energy savings programs.

Durability of the building envelope is important to new homes that are increasingly built with improved levels of airtightness. It is also important to weatherized homes such that energy savings from retrofit measures, such as air sealing, are persistent. This paper presents a comparison of air leakage measurements collected in November 2013 through March 2014, with two sets of prior data collected between 2001-2003 from 17 new homes located near Atlanta, GA, and 17 homes near Boise, ID that were weatherized in 2007- 2008. The purpose of the comparison is to determine if there are changes to the airtightness of building envelopes over time. The air leakage increased in all but one of the new homes, with a mean increase of about 25%. The weatherized homes also showed an increase in the mean air leakage (12%). A regression analysis was performed to describe the relationship between prior and current measurements in terms of normalized leakage (NL). The best estimate of the ageing factor predicts a 15% increase in NL over ten years. Further analysis using ResDB data (LBNL’s Residential Diagnostic Database) showed the expected changes in air leakage if ageing were modelled. These results imply the need to examine the causes of increased leakage and methods to avoid them. This increase in leakage with time should be accounted for in long-term population-wide energy savings estimates, such as those used in ratings or energy savings programs.

This paper reviews empirical data from evaluations of the influence of residential energy efficiency retrofits on indoor environmental quality conditions and self-reported thermal comfort and health. Data were extracted from 36 studies described in 44 papers plus two reports. Nearly all reviewed studies were performed in Europe or United States. Most studies evaluated retrofits of homes with low-income occupants. Indoor radon and formaldehyde concentrations tended to increase after retrofits that did not add whole-house mechanical ventilation. Study-average indoor concentrations of nitrogen dioxide and volatile organic compounds other than formaldehyde increased and decreased with approximately equal frequency. Average indoor temperatures during winter typically increased after retrofits, usually by less than 1.5 °C. Dampness and mold, usually based on occupant's reports, almost always decreased after retrofits. Subjectively reported thermal comfort, thermal discomfort, non-asthma respiratory symptoms, general health, and mental health nearly always improved after retrofits. For asthma symptoms, the evidence of improvement slightly outweighed the evidence of worsening. There was insufficient evidence to determine whether changes in thermal comfort and health outcomes varied depending on the type of energy efficiency retrofit. The published research has numerous limitations including a lack of data from retrofits in warm-humid climates and minimal data on changes in objective health outcomes. Suggestions for future research are provided.