Building insulation - The Sustainability Management Wiki

Authors: Svenja Steidl, Katjana Wolfmeier
Edited by: –
Last updated: May 17, 2026

Executive summary

Building insulation reduces heat transfer through the building envelope and is a core lever for lowering energy use, stabilizing operating costs, and improving comfort. Effective insulation design depends on local climate: cold regions prioritize high thermal resistance and moisture control, while hot and humid regions require reflective, moisture-resistant solutions that also manage air infiltration and biological growth. Understanding these differences helps organizations choose materials and assemblies that deliver durable performance and avoid moisture-related damage.

Economically, insulation is often one of the most cost-effective efficiency investments. Life-cycle cost analysis can identify the insulation thickness that minimizes total cost over time by balancing upfront investment against long-term savings. Savings vary widely with heating and cooling degree-days, building-use patterns, and fuel types. Buildings with continuous occupancy tend to realize larger absolute savings, while energy price levels and system efficiencies strongly influence optimal thickness and payback periods.

Ecologically, insulation has direct impacts from raw material extraction, manufacturing, transport, installation, and end-of-life management. Manufacturing can dominate impacts for mineral and petrochemical-based products, while end-of-life choices (reuse, recycling, energy recovery, or disposal) can meaningfully change the total footprint. Indirectly, insulation reduces operational energy demand and associated emissions; over a building’s lifetime, these avoided emissions often exceed the production impacts. Bio-based and recycled-fiber options can reduce climate impacts when they meet the same thermal performance requirements, while mineral wool can offer durability and strong fire performance.

Socially, improving insulation can reduce exposure to cold and damp indoor conditions, which are linked to respiratory and mental health harms, especially for households experiencing fuel poverty. Lower energy bills can also reduce financial stress and improve well-being. Finally, policy frameworks shape minimum performance requirements and disclosure. In Germany, the GEG sets minimum standards for new and existing buildings and links insulation quality to compliance, while energy certificates support transparency and comparability in real estate transactions.

1 Description and history

Thermal insulation has been part of building practice since people began constructing shelters. Builders have continuously improved insulation materials to reduce conductive, convective, and radiative heat transfer¹. Convective heat transfer occurs through fluid motion, and insulation reduces it by trapping air or gases in small pockets that limit this movement. Smaller air pockets generally improve insulation performance. According to Klemczak et al. (2024), the need for thermal insulation materials varies significantly worldwide depending on regional climate conditions.

In cold regions, such as Canada or Scandinavia, materials with high thermal resistance and strong moisture control are necessary to minimize heat loss during prolonged winters. In temperate zones (for example, Central Europe and parts of China), insulation design must balance heating and cooling needs.². The common materials in this region are fiberglass, cellulose and EPS². In hot climate zones (including Saudi Arabia, Australia, and India), cooling costs are often high². Therefore the insulation materials need to be reflective, moisture-resistant and fire-resistant. In humid regions (such as Brazil, Southeast Asia, and the southern United States), insulation must manage moisture, limit air infiltration, and resist biological growth because humidity is high and temperatures can vary.². Common options include closed-cell spray foam, rigid foam boards, and fiberglass paired with vapor barriers.

Flexible insulation demands are needed in mixed and transitional climates (e.g. United States, Japan, and Mediterranean countries). The materials have to perform under diverse conditions². Understanding climate differences helps teams select appropriate insulation materials that improve energy efficiency, comfort, and durability and support sustainable development and resilience².

In prehistoric and preindustrial times, people had to survive harsh climates. That need drove the development of early insulating materials³. These early approaches relied on natural, locally available materials such as straw, mud, and wool to protect against both cold and heat³. Because regions differ, builders used different materials and methods; in ancient Egypt, they used mud bricks mixed with straw for insulation, while the Romans utilized cork and wool in their projects³. Indigenous building traditions also show that insulation has long mattered across climates and regions². People primarily selected construction materials for structural reasons, with insulation often emerging as a beneficial side effect².

In many historical building traditions, the building materials themselves provided insulation² with the advantage of insulation and heat storage. For example, thick stone or brick walls can absorb heat and release it slowly, which helps regulate indoor temperatures².

Brick construction later changed insulation strategies. Builders developed layered walls that created buffering air spaces within walls and roof details². These finials have often been filled with rubble and lime mortar, while the material itself has been stone or brick. During Roman times, builders also placed some buildings partially below ground to reduce exposure to extreme temperatures².

In the nineteenth century, the Industrial Revolution was driven by groundbreaking technological innovations spread across the European continent⁴ and later, the leader as the major catalyst for advanced construction and material technologies. Industry began producing materials such as iron and glass at scale, which enabled new architectural forms⁴. During this period, builders began using wood waste as insulation. Waste from the wood industry, such as wood shavings, sawdust, and wood pulp were used to produce insulating boards for wall and roof insulation³. Wood waste gained popularity because it was widely available and inexpensive³. Builders also mixed wood waste with wastepaper to create loose-fill insulation for cavities in walls and floors. The first production plant was established in 1928. Manufacturers also produced boards from wood waste and sawdust bound with mineral binders⁵. Since the 1940s, cement-chip boards and blocks (made from a combination of wood chips, cement, lime and minerals)⁵ They have been used until now in central and eastern Europe.

Builders have also used wood wool as an insulating material for centuries. After people used it to package fragile goods, they recognized that its lightweight structure also made it useful for insulation³. Mass production began in the late nineteenth century. Due to its biodegradable and renewable attributes, the interest in wood wool has grown in recent decades³. Asbestos, now known as a problematic material, was also developed in the 19th century. The advantages of the natural fibrous material are the thermal conductivity and fire resistance⁶. By the mid-twentieth century, asbestos consumption peaked worldwide, even as evidence of serious health risks (including asbestosis and lung cancer) accumulated⁶. Following that, many countries decided to restrict or ban this material. In response, manufacturers developed and scaled alternative materials such as Mineral wool, fiberglass and foam glass, plastic foams, cellulose insulation.

According to Klemczak et al. (2024), standards for the thermal insulation of external walls, roofs, floors, windows, and doors have steadily increased since 2013.

2 Economic performance

Reducing energy consumption⁷, and stabilize operating costs⁸ drives the economic case for building insulation. Because insulation is among the most cost-effective energy-efficiency measures in the building sector⁹, building insulation plays a key role in national energy and climate strategies².

2.1 Energy cost savings

Building insulation leads to significant energy cost savings. The magnitude of savings is highly sensitive to climatic conditions, fuel types, and building use.

Climatic drivers

To estimate the required energy demand, the number of heating degree-days (HDD) and cooling degree-days (CDD) analysts calculate. These indicators provide the basis for assessing climate-related heating and cooling needs. Based on this calculation, a life-cycle cost analysis (LCCA) analysts perform to determine the optimal insulation thickness for building envelopes¹⁰.

When teams apply the optimal insulation thickness, they can see a substantial difference in achievable energy savings between cold and warm climate zones. In colder zones, energy savings can amount to as much as around 259.15 kWh/m²⁷. In contrast, buildings located in warmer zones achieve savings of approximately 18.41 kWh/m²⁷.

Usage profiles

Depending on the usage profile of buildings, key factors like influencing thermal demand, primary energy consumption, and economic performance of insulation measures are described. They define schedules, operating hours, and comfort requirements. All of these directly affect the heating and cooling loads⁷.

There are six primary building-use categories, which can be grouped according to occupancy patterns:

1. Permanent occupancy (day and night):

This includes apartments, detached houses, and clinics. In these buildings, a continuous maintenance of indoor thermal comfort causes high primary energy consumption for heating and cooling⁷.

2. Daytime occupancy:

This building-use category includes schools and bank branches. They are occupied only during defined daytime hours and remain closed at night⁷. This results in significantly lower heating and cooling demand than in permanent occupancy.

3. Extended daytime and partial night occupancy:

This includes, for example, supermarkets, which are longer open than banks and schools and have high internal heat gains from lighting, refrigeration, and equipment. Out of these factors, supermarkets exhibit cooling-dominated demand profiles⁷.

Comparing those three occupancies, schools show the lowest primary energy consumption per square meter of conditioned floor area⁷. Causes are limited daily operating hours and closure during holidays. In contrast, permanently occupied buildings have the highest energy requirements due to continuous thermal conditions⁷.

Fuel dependency

Fuel consumption represents a major factor in reducing operating costs and is strongly influenced by both the type of fuel used and the level of insulation. For instance, the application of expanded polystyrene (EPS) insulation can reduce fuel consumption by up to 26.7%¹¹.

The economic and energetic performance varies depending on the energy source, system efficiency, and optimal insulation thickness⁷. An overview is provided below (Table 1):

Table 1: Overview of the system efficiency due to the energy source.

Parameter

Natural Gas

Fuel Oil (Diesel)

Coal

System Efficiency (ƞ)

0.90

0.80

0.65

Lower Heating Value (LHV/Hu)

~34.5 MJ/m³

~21.11 MJ/kg

~41.32 MJ/kg

Optimum Insulation Thickness (OIT)

2.8 to 13.2 cm

4.8 to 19.3 cm

3.4 to 14.9 cm

Max Annual Energy Savings (Ardahan, 5th Climate Zone)

183.76 kWh/m²·a

217.69 kWh/m²·a

259.15 kWh/m²·a

The OIT values are based on the use of expanded polystyrene (EPS), rock wool (RW), glass wool, and extruded polystyrene (XPS) across different provinces ranging from Adana to Ardahan. The maximum annual energy savings refer to the highest calculated values obtained for Ardahan (5th climate zone), particularly when using rock wool (RW)⁷.

2.2 Investment cost and payback period

From an economic perspective, investment cost and payback period (PP) are the main indicators in evaluating building insulation. These indicators assess the financial viability of insulation measures by comparing initial costs with long-term energy cost savings. While insulation generally reduces operating expenses, the time it takes for the costs to be offset by this reduction depends on climatic, economic and technical boundary conditions.

2.2.1 Investment cost structure

The economic cost of implementation (ECI), expressed in euros per square meter (€/m²), determines the required investment for thermal insulation measures and depends on the insulation material, the applied thickness, the type of insulation system (e.g. ETICS), the construction element (e.g. external wall, roof or floor) and country-specific conditions¹².

The implementation cost can be broken down into three main components:

1. Insulation material cost:

In this section, the cost of the thermal insulation material (e.g. EPS, XPS, rock wool or glass wool) is specified¹². The cost of the material depends on its thickness and the treated surface area and is independent of national economic conditions.

2. Installation and labour cost:

Labour costs depend strongly on regional wage levels and construction practices and are typically proportional to the national minimum wage. As a result, they strongly influence on the payback period¹².

3. Additional system components:

The type of construction element determines the cost of additional materials required for system application, such as reinforcement mesh or finishing layers, which contribute to the total investment cost.

2.2.2 Payback period drivers

The payback period is defined as the time required to recover the initial investment cost through cumulative energy cost savings. Several key factors influence this duration:

1. Climatic conditions:

Thermal insulation enables energy savings of up to 90% and leads to shorter payback periods as energy demand increases. With rising heating degree‑days (HDD), the payback period may decrease from around 11 years to approximately 3 years. As a result, insulation investments recover faster in both hot and cold climate zones than in moderate climates, making insulation particularly cost‑effective in regions with high heating or cooling energy requirements¹⁰.

2. Energy prices and fuel type:

Energy prices for heating and cooling determine the optimum insulation thickness (OIT) and the payback period as the most influential parameters. Natural gas is predominantly used as an energy source for heating and electricity for cooling applications. Rising energy prices lead to higher optimum insulation thicknesses and shorter payback periods¹⁰. Unlike insulation material costs, rising fuel and electricity prices significantly increase the economic appeal of thermal insulation. As energy prices rise, so do the annual energy cost savings and the overall energy savings rate achieved through insulation¹⁰.

2.2.3 Influence of insulation material and building use

Both the choice of insulation material and the building usage profile affect economic outcomes:

1. Insulation material selection:

The selection of insulation material affects the optimal thickness of the insulation through its thermal conductivity and cost. Materials such as expanded polystyrene (EPS) and extruded polystyrene (XPS) have different optimal thicknesses due to variations in price and thermal performance¹². These variations influence the economic outcome of insulation measures.

2. Building usage profiles:

Building usage profiles influence energy demand through factors such as occupancy duration and operating schedules. Buildings with continuous occupancy, such as residential buildings and healthcare facilities, generally have a higher energy demand and achieve greater energy savings than buildings that are used intermittently, such as schools or administrative buildings¹².

2.3 Long‑term economic performance

Additionally, it can be said that the economic performance of insulation measures is largely determined by life-cycle cost analysis (LCCA)¹⁰. This method evaluates investment costs and discounted energy savings over long periods, typically up to 50 years, to determine the optimal insulation thickness from an economic perspective⁷.

Reduced ongoing operating costs contribute to the long-term economic value of buildings, as lower energy and operating costs make them more attractive to owners, buyers and investors¹³^,¹⁰. At the macroeconomic level, energy-efficient renovation measures can also have positive effects, particularly in terms of increased gross value added and employment in the construction sector, which has a comparatively high multiplier effect¹³.

However, risks and uncertainties must also be considered in the economic assessment of insulation measures¹³. These include potential hygrothermal problems, such as moisture and mold formation¹⁴; the volatility of energy prices¹²; and institutional barriers, such as the landlord-tenant dilemma, where investment costs and economic benefits do not accrue to the same party¹³.

3 Ecological performance

Building insulation has both direct and indirect environmental impacts.

3.1 Direct impacts

Direct environmental impacts occur throughout the life cycle stages of building insulation materials. The main stages include raw material extraction, production and processing, transport, installation, and end-of-life treatment, such as disposal or recycling¹⁵^,¹⁶.

Among these stages, the manufacturing phase often contributes significantly to the overall environmental impact. This is mainly due to energy-intensive production processes, which are particularly relevant for mineral insulation materials and petrochemical polymer-based insulation products¹⁵^,¹⁷.

End-of-life management is another important factor. The disposal or recycling of insulation materials can have a measurable influence on the total environmental impact, especially when materials are not recycled and are instead disposed of through landfilling or incineration. For example, EPS can offset its initial footprint by recovering or recycling¹⁵.

3.2 Indirect impacts

Indirect environmental impacts arise from the improvement of a building’s energy efficiency through insulation. By reducing heat losses through the building envelope, insulation materials decrease the energy demand for heating and cooling¹⁶^,¹⁷.

As a result, the reduction in operational energy use can lead to substantial emission savings over the lifetime of a building. In many cases, these savings can exceed the emissions generated during the production of the insulation materials themselves¹⁶.

3.2.1 Ecology of main material classes

1. Bio-based insulation materials

Bio-based insulation materials are produced from renewable resources or biological residues. Examples include hemp fibres, cellulose derived from recycled paper, and flax fibres.

Studies indicate that hemp fiber insulation can produce approximately 10% lower impact on the net global warming Potential (GWP) compared to glass wool insulation¹⁶. Similarly, cellulose insulation is associated with the lowest net emissions compared with glass wool¹⁶. These lower emissions are mainly related to the use of renewable raw materials and recycled inputs, which reduce the demand for fossil resources during production.

2. Mineral wool insulation

The most common mineral wool insulation materials are stone wool and glass wool. They are produced by melting raw mineral materials at very high temperatures and transforming the molten material into fibres. This manufacturing process requires significant energy input, which can negatively influence the environmental performance of these materials¹⁷.

However, life cycle assessments (LCAs) show that mineral wool insulation often exhibits better or comparable environmental performance compared to polystyrene-based insulation materials¹⁵.

Another important advantage of mineral wool insulation is its high durability and good fire resistance. These properties contribute to the long-term stability and safety of the building envelope¹⁷.

3. Recycled fiber insulation (paper wool)

Paper wool insulation is produced from recycled paper fragments that are processed into fibres through mechanical or chemical treatment processes. This recycling-based production allows the use of secondary raw materials instead of virgin resources.

Some studies indicate that when insulation materials provide the same thermal performance, there are no significant environmental differences between stone wool, paper wool, and flax insulation. This means that the ecological performance of these materials can be relatively similar if they achieve the same insulation function¹⁷.

Nevertheless, the use of paper fibres can still provide environmental benefits because it reduces the demand for primary raw materials by using recycled paper as an input material.

3.2.2 Evaluation of ecological performance

Climate type

The benefit of insulation materials depends directly on the context. For example, the heating demands vary widely across Europe (e.g. 10,000 MJ in Portugal vs. 122,000 MJ in Luxembourg), which causes a bigger impact of insulation in colder regions¹⁷.

Comparison at the system level:

To compare different materials, a functional unit is used. To conduct this on a fair level the entire cradle-to-grave system boundary must be included, especially the potential to reuse¹⁵^,¹⁶.

Current trends

Currently, some trends can be observed in the building sector. As the sector tries to be climate-neutral, a Shift to more hemp and Recycling Cellulose Drives the Market¹⁶. Over time techniques and procedures for recycling and energy recovery at the end of the life of petrochemical foams like EPS and XPS reduces the total footprint¹⁵. Another Change that is important to Name is the updated EN 15804 + A2, which states that end-of-life impacts and recovery potential must be reported, which leads to more transparency in circularity¹⁵.

4 Social impact

It has been shown that living in energy-inefficient and poorly insulated housing can have significant social and health consequences, particularly for low-income households experiencing fuel poverty¹⁸. The literature shows that cold and damp homes are associated with harmful physical and mental health outcomes, including poor respiratory health, asthma and common mental disorders¹⁸. Due to low indoor temperatures and indirectly broader social stressors such as financial strain, social insulation and restricted use of living space, fuel poverty can negatively affect health. Interventions to improve energy efficiency and affordability, including the improvement of building insulation, are therefore widely viewed as socially beneficial¹⁸.

There are two pathways to choose from for linking energy efficiency improvements to improved well-being.¹⁸. Firstly, insulation and related measures improve indoor thermal conditions by raising air temperatures and reducing humidity and dampness. This contributes to better respiratory health and enhanced mental well-being by increasing thermal satisfaction, expanding usable living space and reducing social isolation¹⁸. Secondly, improved energy efficiency reduces heating costs, alleviating financial stress and fuel poverty¹⁸. This frees up household resources for food security and other essential expenditures, further reducing social isolation. As a result, building insulation delivered important positive social impacts by improving central psychosocial influences on health with long-term health benefits¹⁸. However, insulation upgrades alone cannot eliminate existing social and health inequalities, although they can help reduce them.

5 Political and legal aspects

The policy of building insulation differs worldwide. As an example, the focus is set on the European Union and specifically on Germany.

5.1 Background EU targets of energy efficiency in buildings

Due to the sector’s significant environmental impact, energy efficiency in the building sector is a key focus of European climate and energy policy. The European Union has committed, based on the European Green Deal and European Climate Law, to achieve climate neutrality by 2050 and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 55 % by 2030 (European Commission). Since buildings account for around 40 % of final energy consumption and 36 % of energy-related greenhouse gas emissions in the EU, improving their energy performance is crucial to meeting these targets (European Commission).

In addition to the high energy demand of construction and operation of buildings, a large amount of resources are required, and this generates nearly 40 % of total waste in the EU. Domestic raw materials are available only in limited quantities, which increases reliance on imports, which causes environmental pressures such as resource depletion, deforestation and water scarcity (European Commission). In addition, urban buildings contribute to the urban heat island effect, increasing the cooling demand and exacerbating climate impacts.

To address these challenges, a list of research and innovation targets the European Commission produced in collaboration with the SET Plan Steering Group and stakeholders (European Commission). These targets aim to reduce the energy use of buildings and to develop cost-efficient, zero-emission building solutions. Other targets also include shortening energy-related construction times, improving the accuracy of predicted versus actual building energy performance and deploying data-driven applications to maximize building flexibility (European Commission). Finally, the targets promote the sustainable use of resources by increasing the reusability and high-value recyclability of building materials.

5.2 GEG

In Germany, the ‘Gesetz zur Einsparung von Energie und zur Nutzung erneuerbarer Energien zur Wärme- und Kälteerzeugung in Gebäuden’ (GEG) regulates the minimum energy performance requirements for building insulation in existing and new buildings. This law aims to reduce energy demand and greenhouse gas emissions in the building sector. The following section summarizes of the main aspects of existing and new buildings regarding building insulation.

New buildings:

In the GEG, all requirements for new buildings are specified, especially in § 15-23 for residential and public buildings.

Due to § 15 Section 1 GEG, the annual primary energy demand of a building must not exceed that of a defined reference building. This reference building (defined in Annex 1) represents a standardized model with specified technical parameters, including insulation levels for walls, roofs and windows. The GEG also sets limits for transmission heat losses (§16 GEG). This ensures that heat losses through external components are minimized.

Non-residential buildings are more treated in § 21-25 GEG, but apply to similar principles. Where § 24 GEG sets limits to primary energy demand, requirements for the transmission heat loss appear in § 25 Section 1-11 GEG. The reference building parameters are specified in Annex 2.

Existing buildings:

The regulations for existing buildings can be found in § 47 – 51 GEG. If buildings that are regularly heated do not meet minimum thermal-insulation standards, the GEG requires owners of residential and non-residential buildings to insulate the top-floor ceiling. Exemptions apply if technical constraints limit the thickness of the insulation, for certain small owner-occupied residential buildings and in cases where the investment is not economically viable (§47 Section 1-4 GEG). When external building components of heated or cooled rooms are renewed, replaced or newly installed, they must meet the maximum thermal transmittance (U-value) specified in Annex 7 of the GEG. Minor measures affecting less than 10 % of the component area are excluded (§48 GEG).

Overall, the GEG regulates building insulation indirectly in terms of the energy performance approach. As a result, high-quality building insulation is required for legal compliance and forms a foundation for energy-efficient and climate-friendly construction.

5.3 Energy certificate

In Germany, buildings need an energy certificate to provide information about expected energy demand or measured energy consumption for space heating and hot water. These certificates are designed to enable a rough comparison of the energy performance of buildings¹⁹. The data provide insights into expected heating costs and recommendations for improvements. The basis for energy certificates is provided by the GEG § 79. Therefore, energy certificates are exclusively intended to inform about a building’s energy efficiency and to allow a general comparison between buildings¹⁹.

There are two different kinds of energy certificates in Germany: Energiebedarfsausweis (energy performance certificate) and Energieverbrauchausweis (energy consumption certificate)¹⁹.

The energy performance certificate shows the calculated annual primary and final energy demand of a building under standardized conditions, and it is mandatory for new buildings¹⁹. The advantage of the energy performance certificate is that it enables an objective comparison, independent of user behaviour. The complex calculations and extensive data requirements make it less suitable for existing buildings¹⁹.

The energy consumption certificate is based on actual energy consumption data from previous billing periods, reflecting real usage¹⁹. It is still influenced by user behaviors, despite weather adjustments. Although it is inexpensive and easy to issue, these behaviour effects allow only limited comparability between buildings¹⁹.

Several submission requirements apply in the case of sales, rentals, leases or similar transactions. The certificate must be presented to potential buyers or tenants at the latest during the property viewing, or immediately upon request¹⁹. It is also mandatory that the certificate be handed over to the new owner/user without delay. The certificate is valid for 10 years¹⁹.

References

1
Zhan, N., Xu, Y., Di Wang, Zhou, W., & Lv, H. (2016). Research on the Heat Transfer Rules of Natural Convection in a Building with Single Heat Source. Procedia Engineering, 146, 75–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.06.355
2
Klemczak, B., Kucharczyk-Brus, B., Sulimowska, A., & Radziewicz-Winnicki, R. (2024). Historical Evolution and Current Developments in Building Thermal Insulation Materials—A Review. Energies, 17(22), 5535. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17225535
3
Kośny, J., & Yarbrough, D. W. (Eds.). (2022). Green Energy and Technology. Thermal Insulation and Radiation Control Technologies for Buildings (1st ed. 2022). Springer International Publishing; Imprint Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-98693-3
4
Bozsaky, D. (2010). The historical development of thermal insulation materials. Periodica Polytechnica Architecture, 41(2), 49–56. https://doi.org/10.3311/pp.ar.2010-2.02
5
Cetiner, I., & Shea, A. D. (2018). Wood waste as an alternative thermal insulation for buildings. Energy and Buildings, 168, 374–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.03.019
6
Frank, A. L., & van Zandwijk, N. (2024). Asbestos history and use. Lung Cancer, 193, 107828. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2024.107828
7
Akyüz, M. K. (2025). Enviroeconomic optimization of insulation thickness for building exterior walls through thermoeconomic and life cycle assessment analysis. Case Studies in Thermal Engineering, 65, 105606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2024.105606
8
Annibaldi, V., Cucchiella, F., & Rotilio, M. (2021). Economic and environmental assessment of thermal insulation. A case study in the Italian context. Case Studies in Construction Materials, 15, e00682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2021.e00682
9
Boussaa, Y., Dodoo, A., Nguyen, T., & Rupar-Gadd, K. (2023). Integrating Passive Energy Efficient Measures to the Building Envelope of a Multi-Apartment Building in Sweden: Analysis of Final Energy Savings and Cost Effectiveness. Buildings, 13(10), 2654. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13102654
10
Kaynakli, O. (2011). Parametric Investigation of Optimum Thermal Insulation Thickness for External Walls. Energies, 4(6), 913–927. https://doi.org/10.3390/en4060913
11
Al-Juboori, S. A. (2018). Economic Impact of Thermal Insulation of the Building’s Envelope. European Scientific Journal. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.19044/esj.2018.c4p10
12
Raimundo, A. M., Sousa, A. M., & Oliveira, A. V. M. (2023). Assessment of Energy, Environmental and Economic Costs of Buildings’ Thermal Insulation–Influence of Type of Use and Climate. Buildings, 13(2), 279. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13020279
13
Hartwig, J., & Kockat, J. (2016). Macroeconomic effects of energetic building retrofit: input-output sensitivity analyses. Construction Management and Economics, 34(2), 79–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2016.1144928
14
Basińska, M., Kaczorek, D., & Koczyk, H. (2021). Economic and Energy Analysis of Building Retrofitting Using Internal Insulations. Energies, 14(9), 2446. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14092446
15
Hernando Castro, S. M., Carabaño Rodríguez, R., López Arquillo, J. D., & Perea Álvarez de Eulate, M. (2025). Comparative evaluation of construction insulation materials: Environmental performance across production, end-of-life, and beyond system boundaries. Journal of Building Engineering, 99, 111570. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2024.111570
16
Hult, M., & Karlsmo, S. (2022). Life Cycle Environmental and Cost Analysis of Building Insulated with Hemp Fibre Compared to Alternative Conventional Insulations – a Swedish Case Study. Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering, 30(1), 106–120. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.sace.30.1.30357
17
Schmidt, A. C., Jensen, A. A., Clausen, A. U., Kamstrup, O., & Postlethwaite, D. (2004). A Comparative Life Cycle Assesment of Building Insulation Products made of Stone Wool, Paper Wool and Flax: Part 1: Background, Goal and Scope, Life Cycle Inventory, Impact Assesmsent and Interpretation Part 2: Comparative Assessment.
18
Grey, C. N. B., Jiang, S., Nascimento, C., Rodgers, S. E., Johnson, R., Lyons, R. A., & Poortinga, W. (2017). The short-term health and psychosocial impacts of domestic energy efficiency investments in low-income areas: A controlled before and after study. BMC Public Health, 17(1), 140. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-017-4075-4
19
Schmidt, P. (2025). Das novellierte Gebäudeenergiegesetz (GEG 2024): Grundlagen. Anwendung in der Praxis, Beispiele. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-44921-6

1
Zhan, N., Xu, Y., Di Wang, Zhou, W., & Lv, H. (2016). Research on the Heat Transfer Rules of Natural Convection in a Building with Single Heat Source. Procedia Engineering, 146, 75–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.06.355
2
Klemczak, B., Kucharczyk-Brus, B., Sulimowska, A., & Radziewicz-Winnicki, R. (2024). Historical Evolution and Current Developments in Building Thermal Insulation Materials—A Review. Energies, 17(22), 5535. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17225535
3
Kośny, J., & Yarbrough, D. W. (Eds.). (2022). Green Energy and Technology. Thermal Insulation and Radiation Control Technologies for Buildings (1st ed. 2022). Springer International Publishing; Imprint Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-98693-3
4
Bozsaky, D. (2010). The historical development of thermal insulation materials. Periodica Polytechnica Architecture, 41(2), 49–56. https://doi.org/10.3311/pp.ar.2010-2.02
5
Cetiner, I., & Shea, A. D. (2018). Wood waste as an alternative thermal insulation for buildings. Energy and Buildings, 168, 374–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.03.019
6
Frank, A. L., & van Zandwijk, N. (2024). Asbestos history and use. Lung Cancer, 193, 107828. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2024.107828
7
Akyüz, M. K. (2025). Enviroeconomic optimization of insulation thickness for building exterior walls through thermoeconomic and life cycle assessment analysis. Case Studies in Thermal Engineering, 65, 105606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2024.105606
8
Annibaldi, V., Cucchiella, F., & Rotilio, M. (2021). Economic and environmental assessment of thermal insulation. A case study in the Italian context. Case Studies in Construction Materials, 15, e00682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2021.e00682
9
Boussaa, Y., Dodoo, A., Nguyen, T., & Rupar-Gadd, K. (2023). Integrating Passive Energy Efficient Measures to the Building Envelope of a Multi-Apartment Building in Sweden: Analysis of Final Energy Savings and Cost Effectiveness. Buildings, 13(10), 2654. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13102654
10
Kaynakli, O. (2011). Parametric Investigation of Optimum Thermal Insulation Thickness for External Walls. Energies, 4(6), 913–927. https://doi.org/10.3390/en4060913
11
Al-Juboori, S. A. (2018). Economic Impact of Thermal Insulation of the Building’s Envelope. European Scientific Journal. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.19044/esj.2018.c4p10
12
Raimundo, A. M., Sousa, A. M., & Oliveira, A. V. M. (2023). Assessment of Energy, Environmental and Economic Costs of Buildings’ Thermal Insulation–Influence of Type of Use and Climate. Buildings, 13(2), 279. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13020279
13
Hartwig, J., & Kockat, J. (2016). Macroeconomic effects of energetic building retrofit: input-output sensitivity analyses. Construction Management and Economics, 34(2), 79–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2016.1144928
14
Basińska, M., Kaczorek, D., & Koczyk, H. (2021). Economic and Energy Analysis of Building Retrofitting Using Internal Insulations. Energies, 14(9), 2446. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14092446
15
Hernando Castro, S. M., Carabaño Rodríguez, R., López Arquillo, J. D., & Perea Álvarez de Eulate, M. (2025). Comparative evaluation of construction insulation materials: Environmental performance across production, end-of-life, and beyond system boundaries. Journal of Building Engineering, 99, 111570. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2024.111570
16
Hult, M., & Karlsmo, S. (2022). Life Cycle Environmental and Cost Analysis of Building Insulated with Hemp Fibre Compared to Alternative Conventional Insulations – a Swedish Case Study. Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering, 30(1), 106–120. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.sace.30.1.30357
17
Schmidt, A. C., Jensen, A. A., Clausen, A. U., Kamstrup, O., & Postlethwaite, D. (2004). A Comparative Life Cycle Assesment of Building Insulation Products made of Stone Wool, Paper Wool and Flax: Part 1: Background, Goal and Scope, Life Cycle Inventory, Impact Assesmsent and Interpretation Part 2: Comparative Assessment.
18
Grey, C. N. B., Jiang, S., Nascimento, C., Rodgers, S. E., Johnson, R., Lyons, R. A., & Poortinga, W. (2017). The short-term health and psychosocial impacts of domestic energy efficiency investments in low-income areas: A controlled before and after study. BMC Public Health, 17(1), 140. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-017-4075-4
19
Schmidt, P. (2025). Das novellierte Gebäudeenergiegesetz (GEG 2024): Grundlagen. Anwendung in der Praxis, Beispiele. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-44921-6