## 4 Case Study: Validation of the Evaluation Approach in a Controlled Environment
### Definition of Weighting Schemes, Targets, Boundaries and Calculation of Cost and Benefit Values  
The evaluator makes use of the information introduced by the user in the problem definition phase. In it targets, boundaries and prioritisation criteria are set. In this case, the definition of targets and boundaries has been the following:  
* ENV06 (maximum): 50
- ECO02.2 (maximum): 15.000C
- ECO05 (maximum): 30
- ENV01 (maximum): 50
* ENV06 (minimise): 25
- ECO05 (minimise): 20
- ENE09 (maximise): 50  
For the prioritisation criteria, a total of 14 pre-defined weighting schemes were deployed [38]. In them weights are assigned to each DPI according to the final goal the user has. The complete list of weighting schemes generated is the following:  
* **Scheme 1**: Priority to achieve a nearly zero energy district
* **Scheme 1A**: Priority to achieve a nearly zero energy district + economic aspects
* **Scheme 2**: Priority to achieve a carbon neutral district
* **Scheme 2A**: Priority to achieve a carbon neutral district + economic aspects  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**Type** & **Name** & **Tool** \\ \hline C & ENV01: Global Warming Potential & \\ \hline C & ENV04: Primary energy consumption & NEST \\ \hline C & ENV06: Energy payback time & \\ \hline C & ECO02.2: Investments & \\ \hline C & ECO03: Life cycle cost & Ad-hoc developed tool for economic assessment \\ \hline C & ECO005: Payback period & \\ \hline B (1) & ENE01: Energy demand & \\ \hline B (1) & ENE02.0: Final energy consumption & \\ \hline B (1) & ENE06: Net fossil energy consumed & Energy Plus and Ad-hoc developed tool for HVAC and control simulation \\ \hline B (1) & ENE09: Energy demand covered by renewable sources & Energy Plus and Ad-hoc developed tool for HVAC and control simulation \\ \hline B (1) & ENE13: Energy use from District Heating & \\ \hline B (1) & COM01: Local thermal comfort & \\ \hline B (2) & ENE14: Energy use from biomass & \\ \hline B (2) & ENE15: Energy use from PV & \\ \hline B (2) & ENE16: Energy use from Solar Thermal & \\ \hline B (2) & ENE17: Energy use from hydraulic & \\ \hline B (2) & ENE18: Energy use from mini-eolic & \\ \hline B (2) & ENE19: Energy use from geothermal & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 9: List of tools used to calculate the indicators.  
* **Scheme 3**: Priority to energy generation through renewables
* **Scheme 3A**: Priority to energy generation through renewables + economic aspects
* **Scheme 4**: Priority to energy generation through renewables (solar thermal and photovoltaic)
* **Scheme 4A**: Priority to energy generation through renewables (solar thermal and photovoltaic) + economic aspects
* **Scheme 5**: Priority to energy generation through the district heating network
* **Scheme 5A**: Priority to energy generation through the district heating network + economic aspects
* **Scheme 6**: Priority to environmental issues
* **Scheme 6A**: Priority to environmental issues + economic aspects
* **Scheme 7**: Priority to reduce operational energy costs
* **Scheme 7A**: Priority to reduce operational energy costs + economic aspects  
In this validation only a selection of schemes has been tested, namely: schemes 1, 1A, 2, 2A, 3, 3A, and 6A. These represent a wide enough representation of the spectrum of possibilities included as objectives in the evaluation method.