the implementation of energy savings.
Here it is especially the Energy Coordinator, who has focused on providing information and make everyday
users aware of what their behaviour means for energy consumption. She has conducted actual behaviour
campaigns. This kind of effort is more difficult to implement than the technical measures. It is hard to
motivate users to stay focused on energy and there is less security of savings in the end. The effort typically
also requires sustained initiatives to keep it up.
In the energy renovation projects for the seven institutions, there has so far not been implemented
behavioural measures. 26,700 euros have been allocated for this purpose, but it is not decided yet how the
money should be spent. According to the Energy Coordinator, it is essential that technical measures will be
followed up with information and guidance on the changes. The reason is that there may otherwise be a
risk that users will not acquire knowledge of the new systems correctly. For instance, that users continue
airing out too much, although it is not necessary with the new ventilation.
This indicates that the municipality pays attention to users' importance in relation to energy savings.
However, there is a tendency that there is a stronger focus on technical optimization. This is related to a
focus on improving the buildings' energy framework which does not involve the use of the building.
Similarly, the energy label overrides the behavioural measures. Thus, there is a challenge in terms of
avoiding the emergence of a technical silo surrounding property management, who find it difficult to play
along with the more social silos, such as school management. The technical service staff may in this context
be important bridge builders.
The 'soft' values
In energy work there is generally a big emphasis on the financial benefits of energy savings. This is probably
related to the fact that from a political standpoint investments should preferably be worthwhile.
Conversely, the energy savings of course also provide the possible of other - so-called 'softer' - forms of
gains. This may, for example, be a better indoor climate and better buildings to teach or care for children
in. These reasons seem to be less central in the process.
This economic paradigm is largely driving the development process. It is driving for how much money is
allocated. It is driving for which solutions are prioritized and selected. Solutions need to be economic and
have a short repayment period.
The principal other municipal core value that comes into play is related to the economic aspects. It is the
general maintenance of the buildings. There was a political ambition that the purpose is not 'only' to save
energy. The savings would however, be implemented in order to simultaneously be an improvement of the
properties. The politicians wanted to make the properties better. This is reflected in the fact that not only
have they selected to optimize the technical facilities, but also completed building improvements. The
project managers thus prioritized actions with a longer repayment period, when there was a maintenance
argument.
Politicians have also been aware that energy renovation could improve the indoor environment. However,
it is not something that has been directly calculated and worked hard on. Nor has there been a dialogue
between the technical and social silos relating to e.g. incorporating school administration's interests.
The 'soft' values reflecting user interests are not so central to the thinking. This creates a technical
approach to solutions which is recovered, and thus gives the desired positive development loop. A
potential for development is then to experiment with what it would mean if the 'soft' values were
increasingly a controlling part of the process.