AMS project task WP4.1: Mapping climate adaptation options in energy efficiency projects Authors: Kerli Kirsimaa, Madis Org, Piret Kuldna /Stockholm Environment Institute Tallinn Centre The knowledge of climate adaptation and mitigation synergies supports balanced policy-making and to avoid trade-offs. Society and public should acknowledge the importance of negative consequences of maladaptation and interactions both adverse and beneficial. The integrated of mitigation-adaptation approach can improve decision-making. Co-benefit of synergic mitigation-adaptation can contribute in the environment and human quality of life decreasing the vulnerability to the climate risks. The report on mapping climate adaptation options in energy efficiency projects, drafted by Stockholm Environment Institute Tallinn Centre, Kerli Kirsimaa, Madis Org, Piret Kuldna, with contributions of all CAMS Platform partners, was submitted in July 31, 2020. The main conclusion of report are as follows. The mitigation and adaptation remained as a separate focus of the energy efficiency project and very few synergies were encountered between those two major climate policy areas. Measures and actions that combined mitigation and adaptation were integrated and considered due to casual coincidences and practical reasoning during implementation in an ad hoc manner. As for the building projects, few special adaptation measures are enforced by law, and thus their implementation depends more on the willingness or knowledge of a developer. Adaptation guidelines exist for new construction, rarely for the ones that need renovation. The dominant measures that enhance the adaptation of existing buildings to changing climate are automated indoor climate; maintenance of plant cover and removal of dangerous trees near the buildings; permeable roads and car parks surrounding the building as well as the stronger attachment of elements fastened to buildings (rain gutters, antennas, and lights). It is feasible to implement more innovative measures to address risks of climate change by mitigation and adaptation synergies such as green roofs and higher foundations (so that basement floors are located at a higher level) and to use construction materials that can cope with excessive moisture (various facade materials, Synthetic Roof Underlayment) in the new construction. Some negative effects and maladaptation were also mapped in this study. In the planning of the measures, these negative effects should be considered and compensated by a combination of measures if possible. You can find the final report on mitigation and adaptation synergies here: http://trea.ee/cams/report-on-combining-climate-adatation-measures-within-ee-projects-in-bsr/

1. CAMS project task WP4.1: Mapping climate adaptation options in energy efficiency projects
Authors: Kerli Kirsimaa, Madis Org, Piret Kuldna
Stockholm Environment Institute Tallinn Centre
WP4.1

2. Aim: Advancing the energy auditing, the qualification programme of housing renovation
and policy dialogue for mitigation and adaptation synergies in housing renovations and
service sector.
Length: 2019-2021
Budget: 1 046 503 € (incl ERDF support 745 435.09 €, ENI/Russian support 98 761.50€ )
Partners:
•Tartu Regional Energy Agency, Estonia – Lead partner
•County Administrative Board of Dalarna, Sweden
•Permanent International Secretariat of the Council of the Baltic Sea States, Sweden
•Ministry of Economics of Latvia, Latvia
•Foundation of Energy Saving in Gdansk, Poland
•Baltic Environmental Forum Latvia, Latvia
•Baltic Environmental Forum Germany, Germany
•Stockholm Environment Institute Tallinn Centre, Estonia
•Peter the Great St.Petersburg Polytechnic University, Russia
What is CAMS project?

3. Goal: Evaluation of climate adaptation and mitigation synergies in the
energy efficiency projects that have impacts in the BSR Region; and among
renovated and newly built building projects in the CAMS project countries.
Methodology: Extensive questionnaires
Synergies of climate change mitigation and adaptation measures – climate measures, which help reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to the effects of climate change at the same time. Measures can be
either adaptation measures that have an impact on mitigation or mitigation measures that have an impact on
adaptation.
Task WP4.1 led by SEI Tallinn
1. The small size of the sample places restrictions on making generalizations. As the responses to the survey
increase, the conclusions may change to some extent.
2. The choices in the questionnaires are based on the respondents’ own assessment. For instance in terms of the
newly built and renovated building projects, the levels of implementation of measures (minimum standard,
above the minimum standard) is based on the respondents' assessment and the difference in national
standards.
RESEARCH LIMITATIONS

4. NUMBER OF BUILDING PROJECTS ANALYSED: 17
Renovated
Sweden:
1. Falun
Estonia:
1. Saue Koondise
2. Tartu Kalevi
Russia:
1. Ruzovskaya
2. Chaikovskogo
Latvia:
1. Katoļu street 17, Jelgava
2. Rīgas ielā 18, Valmiera
Poland
1. School/Administration office,
Sopot, 18/20 Kosciuszki st., 2015
Germany
1. Residential building, Am Brunnenhof
/Gilbertstraße, Hamburg
Newly built
Sweden:
1. Djugard – urban area in Stockholm
2. Castellum – A company in Sweden, questionnaire was filled by following their typical case
Estonia:
1. Järvevana 7b
Russia:
1. Babuškina St.82
Latvia:
1. Business Garden Riga Building X3
2. Business Garden Riga Building C
Poland
1. Residential building, Gdansk, Kielnenska st., 2019
Germany
1. Residential building, Klima Wohl Herzkamp, Hannover
SELECTED CASES
BSR Interreg and other projects in the
BSR Region Topic of the project/main focus
Mitigation/energy efficiency projects
• BEA-APP (Interreg Baltic Sea Region) Spatial planning of renewable facilities
• Effect4buildings (Interreg Baltic Sea
Region) Energy efficiency in buildings and developing tool box
• Green ReMark (European Union, the
Russian Federation and the Republic
of Finland) Support of innovations in green energy production and use
• LowTemp (Interreg Baltic Sea Region) Energy efficiency in district heating
• LUCIA (Interreg Baltic Sea Region) Systems approach to development of outdoor lighting
• Co2mmunity (Interreg Baltic Sea
Region)
Fostering community energy (CE)development as enhancing tool for increasing renewable energy share and
decentralisation of energy systems
Adaptation projects
• CASCADE (European Union Civil
Protection and Humanitarian Aid)
To develop risk assessment methodologies focusing on climate change risks, tailor-made for the local community level
• DG Echo (European Union Civil
Protection and Humanitarian Aid)
Integrated Climate Risk assessment

5. Assessment of BSR energy efficiency projects
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Landscaping and ecosystem services
Tools
Project objectives and aims
Conferences and workshops
Policy documents
Built environment
Energy effeciency measures (engineering etc 'hard')
Studies and surveys
Renewable energy measures (engineering etc 'hard')
Stakeholder and citizen involvement
Pilot projects, districts and sites
Consideration of adaptation aspects in different project outputs of energy
efficiency BSR projects
Included Not included
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Flood & sea level rise
Precipitation
Storm & wind & other extreme weather events
Temperature
Consideration of different climate impacts in energy efficiency BSR projects
Included Not included

6. MAIN OUTCOMES: Assessment of projects with the impact on BSR
1. The project managers of the energy efficiency (mitigation) projects highlighted that the adaptation remained secondary within their
projects due to specific objectives stated by the programme and application.
2. In turn the project managers of the adaptation projects (CASCADE, DG Echo) highlighted that the mitigation remained secondary within
their projects due to specific objectives stated by the programme and application.
3. There was no specific communication or policy support on mitigation & adaptation synergies to the target groups nor designated
deliverables and outputs.
4. The adaptation was discussed in the framework of wider climate policy framework, in the macro approach.
5. Adaptation needs, measures and actions were integrated and considered due to coincidences and practical reasoning during
implementation in ad hoc manner, not directly aiming for adaptation or programmed and planned integrity of mitigation and
adaptation.

7. The analysed building projects
Estonia Russia
Latvia
Sweden
Renovated
buildings
New
buildings
Renovated
buildings
Renovated
buildings
Renovated
building
New
buildings
New
building
New
building
HVAC + water
Site,
landscaping,
management
Energy supply
and building
envelope
Sopot
Gdansk
New building
Renovated building
Germany
Klima Wohl Herzkamp
Brunnenhof
New building
Renovated building
Poland

8. • Light green – measures implemented
to the minimum standard
• Dark green– measures implemented
above minimum standard
Energy and building envelope related measures
New buildings Renovated buildings
RESULTS
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Adaptation
Adaptation with
implication on
mitigation
Mitigation with
implication on
adaptation
Mitigation
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Adaptation
Adaptation with
implication on
mitigation
Mitigation with
implication on
adaptation
Mitigation

9. Adaptation
Adaptation with implication
on mitigation
Mitigation with implication
on adaptation
Mitigation
Adaptation
Adaptation with implication
on mitigation
Mitigation with implication
on adaptation
Mitigation
All other measures except energy and building envelope measures
New buildings
Renovated buildings
RESULTS
• Light green – measures implemented
to the minimum standard
• Dark green– measures implemented
above minimum standard
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

10. • The mitigation and adaptation are rather delivered as two separate policy areas, not in synergy.
• Adaptation implemented in an ad hoc manner.
• Few adaptation measures enforced by law – implementation depends more on the willingness or knowledge of a developer.
• Most used adaptation measures:
• automated indoor climate of the buildings;
• maintenance of plant cover and removal of dangerous trees near the buildings;
• permeable roads and car parks;
• stronger attachment of elements fastened to buildings (rain gutters, antennas, and lights).
• Examples of mitigation and adaptation synergies (synergies are not always positive):
• green roofs;
• higher foundations (basement floors are located at a higher level);
• construction materials that can cope with excessive moisture (various facade materials, Synthetic Roof Underlayment), etc.
• Installation of new and efficient air conditioning
Recommendations:
• In the planning of the measures, the negative effects and maladaptation should be considered and compensated by a combination of
measures if possible.
• Existing norms for buildings should be regularly updated.
• Handbooks and guidelines would help the engineers and architects to draw out some more technical requirements in the future, also
for buildings that need renovation.
• The programming EU climate policy should challenge more specialised approach attempting to integrate the mitigation and
adaptation policies as a horizontal value merit.
OVERALL CONCLUSIONS

11. Thank you!
Kerli Kirsimaa and Piret Kuldna
SEI Tallinn
kerli.Kirsimaa@sei.org; piret.kuldna@sei.org