There are several possible choices and alternatives in the EPB standards. Doesn’t this hinder the comparability and harmonization of the methods?

Having explicit and traceable options in a common methodology is a rational way to take into account national or regional differences in climate, legal context, building tradition and building use. The Mandate M/480 from the European Commission to CEN explicitly asked to develop a harmonized but flexible methodology.

Such differences will indeed hinder the international comparability of the EP calculation methodology. So it would be recommended to check which choices appear to be really necessary, in order to gradually decrease the number of choices to a minimum.

Then, in such a common context that allows a few options, you can always switch between one option and the other to compare results with the same methodology.

Related FAQ:

• On the importance of international harmonization of the EP calculation procedures

2022-02-08