4 2014

/ /

. , . , 11, -1, 212

.+7 (7172) 901-636, 901 960, e-mail: kzeep@mail.ru
www.eep.kz, www.beeca.net

12

22

32

--2014





/
/

:

alexander.belyi@undp.org
:

?__________ 46 .

:
________________________ 7 .

PRO ECO______________________________________________ 8 .
: _____________ 911 .


_________________________________________1216 .
______________________________________ 1719 .
________________________ 20 .
________________________________21 .

_____________________________________2223 .

PR-

____________________________________24 .

:
. , . 11,
-1, 212
. + 7 (717)2 901 636, 901 960,
e-mail: kzeep@mail.ru
www.eep.kz, www.beeca.net

___________________________ 25 .
1000 ____________________________________25 .
-

________________________ 2628 .
DGNB: -________________ 2930 .
___________________________________ 31 .
--2014___________________3233 .
________________3435 .
_____________________ 3637 .
_________ 3839 .
________________ 40 .
Green building stands on three pillars: ecological safety, human
wellbeing, economical efficiency_____________________________ 4142 .

Forces and barriers in energy efficiency of buildings_____________ 4345 .

Energy conservation at schools as a contribution
to environmental protection_________________________________ 4649 .
Songdo ________________________5051 .
Topical problems of the organization of design and construction
of energy efficient buildings in Kazakhstan_____________________ 5253 .
!________________________________________5455 .

-

:
., ., 22, 401,
.: 8(7172) 44-51-67,
8 707 060 06 26
e-mail: vesti_s@inbox.ru


?
/ -
,
.
. .

.

. ,
,
,

.

, .
.
[1]
.

, [2].
, . ,
,
, .
, , ,
,
,
. ,
,
, .

[3] , 1
. ,
. .

[3].
, (-

, ).
.
,
.
,
,
:

Ti=Tiin-Tiout, i=1NN; f1 , /(20); qi=Ei/(S ti) i-

, /2; Ei ( ), i- , ;
ti i- , ; iin iout
i , .
iin= 23 , , . . .
f1 , Q, /(2)
:
Q = (f1 Nf2)0,024,
, , N ; f2
.



, ,

1


:
6286 ,
216 ( )

= 0,87
610
0,8
.

- 4 /2.
4 /2.

. 20112012, 20122013
20132014 .
, . 1 .

. : ,
, . . .
1
,
, 69 , .
139 /(2) (148 /(2),
.
,
[1]. ,

20% .

. 2
.

127,8 /(2)
, (132 /(2), .
, 34,3 /(2), 27% .

,
00074950 / , , 30%
,
. ,

, ,


. -

1. ( 1),
. , ( 2) ( 3). .

 2. ( 1),
. , ( 2) ( 3).
,
. , .
, , .

,

. ,


.

.
,
[4].
.

. ,
. ,
.
, [4].
:
1. 2.04-21-2004*
.
2. Energieeinsparverordnung (EnEV), Bundesministerium fr
Verkehr, Bau- und Wohnungswesen BRD vom 16. November 2001.
3. ..
/. . . // , , 2011.- 375 .
4. . . , 2014 .
,

/
,
,
/

, .
-
20112020 .
-, -, , , ,
, , .
(,
..), ,
. . ,

! , / .
/
- .
.
, /

20072013 .
,
/, ,
,
. , .
20092013 .
22% ( 27%). 1,22,8 . ,
40% !
.



.
, ,

,
.
CD-,

. .

/

, - .
, ,
. ,
5880%, 10 ,
.
,
, , . ,
,
.
, , ,
.


PRO ECO
3 ()
PRO ECO.
.
/
. .
PRO ECO
..
.
.


. , , ,
.
, (
, ),
, .
PRO ECO
( ),
( ).
,
,
.
, 40%. ,
,
.

,
-

,

2011 ,
. , ,
,
.
, . ,
, .
,
, .
, , ,
, , , , , . , ,
.
,
, .
, ,
,
.
, , , , ,

, . ,
, , , , , , .
,
,
. , , , : .
.
?
, , ,
. , ,
() . () . .
,
, .
. ,
. , .
.
,
.
,
, ,
, , ,
.


.
, ,
,
: , , , .
, -
.
, .
,
. , . ,
. , , .
. ,
, .
, .
. , , .
, . , , . !
() .
, .
15 . , : 2/3 400- .
,
. , , , ,
,
. .
,
. ,
, .
, .

.
.
.
,
: , , . , . ,
, , ,
. , , . 2011

, , , , .
, . ,
,
, . ,
. , 6070
-

10

2020
,

, ,
, :

1 2 30%;
100%
2015 ;

25%;
100%
.
,
, . .
, ?
, ( ).
,
5 . ( -

SEVEN-Energy
Efficiency
Center,
,
:


. ,
.
, Lowcost LowEnergy (19992004 .) . (,
), ,
. , ,
, .
, , , , .
4000 2)
368 000 , 4 416 000 .
. . . , .

, , ,
.
. , ,
Ph.D, ,
/ , :
,
,
.
,
.
.
, , , .
, ,
. !
-, .
, , , .

,
, ,
.
-, ,
,
.

, 30 , ,
.
: ,
/ , . ,
.

, ()
.
.
, ,
, , ,
, . ,
,
.
, - .


,


-
,
.
,

, :
,



. ,
,
,
.
. , . .
-
.
.
,
,
.
, . .

.
.

10

11





20132014 .
,
.
,
.

.
, ,

-
,
.
,
, - ,

.
,
, .
,
.
.

12

,
:
;
, ;
;
;
;
, ;
;
;
.
:
,
- ,
- ,
;
- , -
- ;
- ,
-
.

(. , . ,
), .
, ,
.

( : , ,
().
( ),
,

 60 ,

, 50 000 .

2012 1,4 .
23%
.
, (SCADA), ,
( ), , ,
.

(
), .
,
, ,
(SCADA)
, , . ,

. 1,64 . .
( ),
131 000 USD
( .) 128 000 USD
( , ).
: 52 000 USD,
56 000 USD. 79 000 USD,
72 000 USD ( ).
, .
(
).
( /
, 25 ).

!


,
(, , , )

, ,
-
-, - .
:
(2013 ) ( ), , .
.
(2014 )
, , .
,
: ; () / ; / ;
/ ; ;
;
.
,
, ,
. ,
.


, .

: www.eep.kz.

-

13

.
.

/ :
a. - (
).
b. - ( ).
c.
(/)

.
d. 57 ( ).
e. ,
,
- .

:
125 . .
, , , , .
,
.
,
.
5-
.
, :
1 ,
2 ,
3 , ,
4 ,
5 .

14

, :
1. .
2. .
3. .
125
. .
, .
.

.
45%.

.
, ,
, , () ,

.
(
) - .
. - : , ,
, ,
. : , . : .
53 759 193 (
21 021 942 , 16 275 395 . .
19 545,24 .

. ( 50 . )

 7 11 634 ( (
) 8 143 . .
, .
, ,
. .
,
.

.

.

() .
.

15%, 25%.
,
,
.


.
, ,
1:500 .

. Flexalen, . ,
.
. , .

-

.

. ,


.

-.
.

: 125,
112 (), 15% , .
on-line
( , , .).

.
.
() /
. /. () / , ,
.
.
(, ) . ,
. , .
. .
/ , . , . ,
, ,
. , . ,
. -

, !

15

 125

, ,
.


,
, , , ,
,

.
,
. ,
,
:
.

.

.
,
( , , ).

, .
- (
).
; ()
.
,
, .

16

.
:

.
.
,

( , , , .).
, ,
.
.
( )
(
23- ).
,
/ , (
).
, , (.. ),
,
. , .
,
,
/
,

, /


2013
,
, ,
.
.
, /

, , .

, , ,
.
, .
, ,
, ,
-

, /
.
,
.
, . ,
.

,
.
/ ( )

, . , .
.
,
.

.

17

: / . 184 .

,
1,0 2/ -
,
(), ,
, .
, .
,
. - .
.
.
, .

,
. 2007
-1. -

, , ,
.

3 . ,
. .
, , .
. , -
- .
:

. .

. ,
.
. (
), ,
.

-
, . ,
, .
,
. ,
, .

, .

. ,
, .
,

. 2012 .

18

 . 2013 .
, ,
.
, : , - ( ), , .
,



.
, . , ,
, , , , , . ,


. ,
.
, ,
,
.

, ,
,
, .
, ,
. , ,
,

. , , ? : , ,
.
,
, , ,
. , , .

. ,
.

. ?
:
?
, , .
, , , .
. , .
, ,
. . , . , , , .
. ,
,
,
, , .
. ,
.
.
, .
. 2012 .

19



.
/

.
,
,
.
,
12 . 12 2014 .
.
.
,
.
2- - ()
,
. . , . :
. ,
, . .
9- . , .

, , ,
-. , .
, .
,
, .
.

- Green . 3-
Samsung
Galaxy .
2- 230
. iPad mini
.
1- , Lenov,
,
. . .
, ,
,
. .
, , ,
.

.

20

,

/ .

, 2-
-
(), , . :
, ,
, , .
, . ,
.
- ,
.
. .
,
. ,
.

,
, .
,
, ,
.
,
, , .

, - ,
, , ,
. !
.

, .

-,
,
.

, 4- - (), , . :
230
( ).
. 300
. , .
. ,
.
,
.
.

21



,
, . ,
, -
,
.

, , () ,
.
-
. .
, , , .

:
, , ,
-
.
, .
.

, - , .
- ,
, , , , ().
. (, ,
, .) .

22

,
. , /
(20072013 .) (20131014 .).
, . .
11, 198 173. 3. .
( 11),
, ( 198 173),
.
-. 1520-
, , -
,
. , .
,
. , ,
. , ,
400 , 500 .
.
, .
, , ,
, .
,
( , ,
, ) .
,
. , 30%
. .
-
(
),
.
? ,
-

,
.
. .
!
, 11 3
. ()
. , , . ,
, , : , ,
. (!!!) ,
( on-line ).
,
,
.
:
25% (
).

.
, ,
- .

, .
, , - .
, , .
,
() . ,
, ,
. ,
, ! , , . () :
, . , .

-

,
,
,
( ),
.

.

,
,


.
( 11) ( 3),
.
(), : , ,
, ,
(, ).
() , .
: -
(), . - (),
. , () - ,
, ,
. , ,
, , ,
.. , , , .
, , ,
.

() , ,
. , ( , . 31, 42-1, 50-2) -
, .

.

23

,


. . . ,
.
.
2008 .
, , , ,
.
? -,
. , , , .
.
,
, , ,
, . :
, :
-
,
. ,
.
. , ,
. .
,
, , , .
, , ,
, ,
, -

24

. ,
(, ). , , , .
, .
, , .
, . .
. , , , ,
.
:
. , .
,
, ,
.

, PRO ECO.

, ,
. PRO ECO ,
.
: ,
, . , ,
, , ,
, . , . , ,
, .
, .

, ,
.
, , . .

.
,

, , ,
, ,
, .
, .
, , , , . ,
.
, , .
,
, .

, , - .

, , , .
, .
, ,
.

: 13
, ,
.
. , ,
. ,
,
.
,
1520% ,
. , , .

1 000
-

,
1000 ,

.
- (Pinwheel House)

.
. 1 000
. , , ,
, . -, , ,
.
1 000
, ,

2008 . . -
, ,
.
90

. 800 . .
- 8-
. , , .
, .
.
, .
10 000- .

25




4-
/

.






.

,

, /


, - .
( )
-
:
1) 2.04-04-2011 ;
2) 4.02-02-2011 ,
;
3) (2 ): 1- .
; 2- . .

-
, ( . , . , . ,
Energy Partner). - .
:
1. .

.
, :
;
;
;
;
- ;

26

.
, , .
: , ,
;
.
, .
2. ,
.

:
1)
;
2)
;
3) ;
4) .

, - ,
, -
,
.


-

 .

,
.
3. .
( ) :
1- , 2-
.
-,
3D- ,
,
pdf,

, - .
1.


,
, . ,
.
, , .
.
2.04-101-2000, ISO 10211 ISO 14863.
2.
:


;

.

:
1) -
.
2) .
3) .
4) .

. ,
,
- .
,
,
.

13 2012 .
/ .

.

,
.
, .

.

/
.
,

, ,

. -

27

.

, :
) ( - , ;
;
);
) (
;
, ,
);
) (

;
;
- );
) ( , - , ,
; ;

; );
) (
; ).


. , , ., , .

28

,

, - .



.
.

.

BlingCrete , , .
. .
, ,
.
www.blingcrete.com
,
SABER.
,
,
.
, , . ,
.
, SABER
, .
www.vzavtra.net

Senso Sloan
.
.

. ()

.
www.sloanvalve.com

DGNB:
-



.
40%
50% .
,


,
. , DGNB,
.
DGNB,

.
DGNB:
,
.

.
() (), , ,
.
, DNGB, , 35% 20% .
DGNB , ,
( ).
DGNB (DGNB)
.

DGNB(GSBC) :

2007 .

2008 .
GSBC
2009 .
2009
, ,
.
2009
GSBC (GSBC AP).
640
, 280
.
,
, .

GSBC.
2010
GSBC (DGNB).
, DGNB
: , .
, : , , , , ,
. .

, ()

29


,
. ,
, , .

. , , .
, .
,
- ,
, . 70 80%.
, . .
, ,
. , , . , .
.

30

, ,
.
DGNB
, .
DGNB
, LEED ( ) BREEAM (

),
.
www.dgnb.de
- DGNB Navigator
. .

.
DGNB
DGNB . 650 ,
.
. DGNB
400 . DGNB
, , , . DGNB
:
.

DGNB
, . ,
, ,
(Zhangjiang Science and Culture Exchange Centre),
. . , 60% .

.
.
.
: , .
DGNB
, Liujie Architecture Design Co. Ltd.

, ,
.
DGNB
.
DGNB, 68 , .
DGNB
. DGNB
,
.

(DGNB) .






-

,

.

5 ,

, , , , ,
,
, .

.
, 2013- 2014

.
/


,

-
,
. ,
,

.

,

/ .



.

/

,
, ,
(. ) , ,
.

31


--2014
1819 --2014.
-
- . ,
, ,
.
40%
22% .

, -
, .
-
,
,
.
,
8
.
.

,
,

30%
. ,

20112012 .
17 ,
. 2014
12,8 698 .


.
,
.

32

,
,

. ,
65%
.
, ,
, ,
.
,
20% ,
4,6 ,

.
, .
40%. - ,
,

.

.

, /

. ,

,
. ,
.



(
),
.


( , , ).
, /,
, ,

.
(..
), ,

. .
VII
--2014

IV

,
,
. -

,

- .
.
,

,
. .
,
,
.

. , ,
, ,

-
.

,
,
- .

33

2627 . -
: .
, ,
.
, , ,
, , ,
, , .


, ;
.


. , 40%
.
.
. , , ,
, , ,
.

34

, /
.
/, , , .
,
.
, .
(IWO ) / , .
/

.
,
;
.
, , ,
. , , CVL, -

, - ,

.
, , , ,
.
.

. ,
. ,
, , .
.
, , 60% . 2011 - 33 , 2012 46,
.
. .
107
. 23 . 544 .
, , ,
87 .
. ,
, ,

.
,
. ,
, .
-Energy.
,
().
.
, . .
,
,
.

Hot-Tubes

,
, .
, ( Hot-Tubes ),
.
, 24/7,
20 .
, , 80
,
150 .
www.vzavtra.net

Composite Panel Building Systems (CPBS)
C-SIS, , - , .
, C-SIS

, .
, C-SIS , - . ,

,
.
- .
www.vzavtra.net
3D-

3D--,
. 3D-
CyBe Additive Industries, 2013 , .
- ProTo R 3DP
.
, , 4000 /.
, 3D-, ,
CyBe. ,
, , ,
,
24 . . 32
,
. ,
CyBe ,
.
www.vzavtra.net

35

,


2009 - , , .

, . .
. , , . , ,
,
.
,

. 148 ,
1,5 .
.
,

200 .
,
20122015 .


20132015 , .
67 .
: ; ; - ;

36

; ; .
,
.
100%,
74,6% (807 ).
, ,
, , 20%.

. , , . , 12
50 000 ,
,
.
, ,
.
, 220 .
220 . -110 ; 2-
110/10 ; 35/10
-35 . ; -10 . .
110/10/6
. ; -110
220 ( 110 );
. , . .

 13 , 20,5 . 5,5 ,
136,5 .
0,5 , 80,5 .
2020
,
400 .
. ,
.

, .

.

, ,
. 20112014 126 ,
109 91 .
18,8% .
Call Center,
.

.
2,5
, , . 100 .
,
20 .

.
. , -

. . , . 18

, ,
.
. , ,
,
. , 200
70% . ,
1 .
.

57

57

37

,
IWO


,


.

,

.
- ,

.
,
.

, .
, ,
, . ,
, , .
,
, ,
. ,
. ,
, , ,
.
,
. 2050
50%.
60%,
80%.

38

,
, ,
, .
, ,
, .

, .
. .
90- ,
.

: 60%
; 25% ; 15% .
1993 . 2003 .
6,2 . 23 000
, .. 8 500
.
,
?
,
.
,
.

, , . ,
, ,
. ,
,
.


2020 .
20%
2050 .
50%

60%
( 2050 .)

80% 1990. ( 2050 .)
2050
(
)
18 40
, 1979 .
, 40%

.

- ,
, ,

,
.

Fordern -
, ,
(EnEV)
Frdern - ()
KfW, ,

Informieren -

Forschen -



,
. ,

.

.

, .
, ,

. ,
.
.

.
. ,
20 .

,
,
.

,
. ,
.
,
,
.
. , ,
, .
, .
, .

, ,

CO2

20062013 .: 11,1
: 65
:
1:16

CO2 7,2
30-

300 000 !

; ;
;
;
.

,
.

, .
- .
,

.

.
O, , . , ,

, ,
, -
,
, ,
.

39



-Energy
. -
:
2014 .
.

,
(). .
,

, ,
.
20 , .
.



.
,
.
, PLC
.
: ,
,
,
.
PLC-.

.
.

, 0,05%.
0,1.

40

. ,
.
,
,
,
,
.

.

,
.

.
, , .
,
.

, .
, .
,
.

()
, ,
.
:
78% 1516% .

, ,
, .

Green building stands on three pillars:

ecological safety, human wellbeing,
economical efficiency

Daniar Azymhanov,
Director of Kazakhstan Green Building
Council (KazGBC)
Kazakhstans Green Building Council (KazGBC) is a non-profit
association, established in 2013, which aims to change peoples
attitude towards the construction and operation of buildings through
the development of green construction industry in Kazakhstan.
KazGBC focuses on the promotion of green building idea, providing the
construction market participants with information on the subject, creating
a community of professionals in green building and of the national
certification system for green buildings.
Green building councils are formed in more than 100 countries and
operate under the auspices of the World Green Building Council World GBC.
KazGBC Director Daniar Azymhanov talks on its activities.
Kazakhstan Green Building Council KazGBC is a non-profit
organization established by construction market actors to develop green
building in Kazakhstan. Such councils like ours exist in 98 countries around

the world, and are united under the World Green Building Council
WorldGBC, involved in development of green building worldide at the
supranational level. In Kazakhstan, we have identified four key directions
in the work: to popularize the idea of green building, provide the market
with information on green building, train and nurture professional
community in green building, create the national standard for green
construction. On these directions we conduct various kinds of round
tables, trainings and workshops, excursions, develop an information
portal on green construction. It is still early to talk about the results and
achievements we started less than six months ago, and concentrate
so far mainly on self-education and study of the international experience.
To what extent is this direction relevant to
Kazakhstan? What are the criteria to determine,
whether it is a green home or not? Are there standards
for green housing?
Kazakhstan started transition to green economy, which implies
more energy and water efficiency, waste processing development,
reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, and a number of other activities
in all our economy sectors. On world statistics, buildings consume up
to 20% of all the water, 2540% of all energy and 40% of the timber.
Buildings also account for 3040% of greenhouse gas emissions
and generate 35-40% of garbage. Therefore, transformation of the
construction sector in Kazakhstan and its transition onto the green
rails should become a key target in the set of measures in the greening
of our economy. This applies to homes, offices, commercial, industrial
and other buildings. Without it there is no green economy.
To understand whether the building is green, or not, takes an
appropriate assessment of its environmental characteristics. In case
these characteristics are better than the standards and requirements
prescribed by the state to your building, you can say it is green.
Few people can make this assessment on their own. For it, there
are different systems of environmental assessment of buildings in the
world and accredited professionals in the area. Such systems are also
called standards of green construction that enable a holistic analysis of
the building and obtaining of independent expert assessment of a third
party. The obtained assessment can be used by those, who asked for it
for various purposes, including in marketing ends.
Nowadays there are dozens of different standards in green building
in the world, but the most accepted and recognized are four of them:

41

LEED created in the US, BREEAM the UK, DGNB Germany,

and Green Star in Australia. By date more than 1 billion square meters
of various buildings are certified or under certification on various
international systems.
Does it make sense then to talk of creating our
own national green building standard?
It surely does. National certification system of green buildings
is certainly needed, not only for homes, but also for other buildings. It
is important to understand that our system, like the rest in the world,
has to be non-mandatory all the mandatory requirements cease to
be regarded as green. And with non-mandatory system applied, the
construction is better, even of excellent quality, stimulating thereby the
evolution of markets and technologies.
We could develop the national system ourselves, or emulate one of
the international systems, but one thing is certain the national system
is necessary. National standards should take into account a number of
local factors, such as language, measurement units, geographic and
climatic conditions, building codes, national priorities, and others. None
of the international systems can embrace all these factors. The national
system should also encourage the emergence of domestic cohort of
professionals in green building, local production of environmentally
friendly building materials. In other words, in the coming decade it must
give rise to a mass spread of green building culture in our country,
create a new construction paradigm and enroot green approaches in the
construction industry, helping thereby in the transition of Kazakhstan to
the green economy. International systems are unable to attain this task.
What green projects are already being
implemented or have been implemented in Kazakhstan
in construction?
In Kazakhstan several major green development projects have
been launched in the construction of residential and commercial estate,
both for the EXPO 2017 and individual. These projects will be certified on
the LEED and BREEAM standards. More detail on the first projects can
be found on our website kazgbc.kz.
Tell us about your partners and KazGBC
cooperation with the UNDP project Energy efficient
design and construction of residential buildings.
We established a good teamwork with UNDP from the very start
of the KazGBC. We jointly conducted a round table and workshops on
green construction, interact in the creation of national green buildings
certification system. I believe that our cooperation will be long-term,
given the correlated goals.
Among our key partners are the RealInvest Group, BASF, SamrukKazyna Real Estate Fund , FSC, BI Group, Saint Gobain, SGS, Colliers
International, CBRE, Global Development and a number of other equally
solid and important to us organizations. Range of our partners expands
almost daily.
Who funds construction of green homes? Is this
construction gainful to the developers? What are the
gains to the owner of such a home and to the state?
Green building stands on three pillars: ecological safety,

42

Our President Nursultan Nazarbayev approved the

Decree on the concept of Kazakhstan Republics
transition to the green economy that lays the
groundwork for profound systemic transformation,
transition to the economy of new formation by
raising Kazakhstan populations living standards
and the countrys joining the ranks of 30 world
advanced nations, while minimizing the burden
on the environment and natural resources
degradation.
human wellbeing, economical efficiency. Together, these three
factors give the synergy that makes green building projects beneficial
to all the parties. The state rationally uses natural resources and gets
a healthier and happier nation. People get a favorable, healthy and
comfortable environment for their life and activities, save on utility
bills and maintenance costs. Developers and investors get a betterquality and more competitive product, premium in selling or leasing
it. All contribute to the sustainable development of our society and
economy.
Our country is short of accommodation, which
above all is overly expensive too. Wouldnt the green
construction lead to an even bigger appreciation of the
real estate?
Personally, I do not always understand what makes the price of
the real estate, now offered on the market: crisis, devaluation, country
rating, funding of the developer, US monetary policy, oil price, EXPO,
sellers speculative mood? ... In case of certified green buildings I
understand why I pay extra and how I will benefit by it.
World experience shows that the certification of the building on green
standards may not tell on its cost, and it can also hype it up manifold.
Everything depends on the approaches and technologies applied in each
building. The market will put everything in its place, and determine a fair
premium for each project.

Forces and barriers in energy

efficiency of buildings
Leadership implies responsibility. The Republic
of Kazakhstan, setting ambitious and challenging
task in energy efficiency, demonstrates a high
level of responsibility to the world community,
directing efforts towards transformation of the
economy in order to achieve new parameters
of its efficiency, one of which is the energy
efficiency of buildings.

Yulia Nichkasova,
international consultant
of UNDP / GEF project (Minsk)
Kazakhstan Republic targets joining the ranks of 30 world advanced
nations by the year 2050 and building a sustainable economy. To meet this
target a strategic objective is pursued to reduce energy intensity of GDP,
including in 2015 down to 10%. These goals are attained by addressing
sectoral tasks in industry, energy, utilities, construction and transport.
By the RK Government Decree of August 29, 2013 904 On
approval of the Energy Saving 2020 program, the task in the construction
is to make 100% energy efficient buildings from 2015, in the utilities it is
reduction of specific energy consumption per 1 sqm by 30%, and the
reduction of normative heat losses by 3,6%.
Achieving the goal of energy-efficient construction in 2015 means
that all the buildings, whose construction start in the next year, have to
conform to energy efficiency class A and B. However, I believe it should
be noted that the program says what to do, but does not answer the
question how to do it. We will try to answer it, analyzing the life cycle of
a building.
In Kazakhstan, creation and operation of a real estate object, as
follows from the analysis, involves three stakeholders: the state, business
units and homeownerships families and individuals (householders).
They have different force of influence in this process, and pursue
different values.
These parties are motivated for energy efficiency, because common
sense and logic suggest that it is beneficial to all the three parties. But
by force of the peoples inertia of innovation perception, high level of
conservativeness of the industry, duration of the life cycle and sizeable
investment in the creation of the object, energy efficiency is balked.
The state is the main driving force of energy efficiency, motivated
to create conditions for sustainable development of the society. By
establishing rules and requirements, it regulates energy efficiency at all
stages of the buildings life cycle.
The state provides land to a business unit- the primary resource for
the construction. However, at this stage, the requirements for energy
efficiency class of the estate object are not established. Absence of
these requirements at the initial stage of the buildings life cycle is a
barrier to its energy efficiency.
At the phase of design, construction and operation, the state
provides control through five state institutions:
local authorities, represented by architecture bodies at the stage

of the selection and provision of land, issuing of permits for the design
works, technical specifications and architectural-planning assignment,
expertizing bodies at the stage of the building project appraisal,
State Architectural and Construction Supervision bodies at the
stage for obtaining construction permits, construction and installation
works, acceptance into operation,
certification bodies in the issuance of certificates of conformity
and declarations of construction materials quality,
energy audit bodies at the stage of operation of the facility,
and again all the above-mentioned bodies when deciding on
thermal upgrading of the building.
However, control of compliance with energy efficiency is not
provided in full, because it is narrowly directional and one of the host
of functions carried out by these organizations. There is a barrier on the
way to energy efficiency here.
The State, through the formation of the tariff policy on living
resources of the building, the ideological and awareness raising work,
stimulates the adoption of economically viable solutions in terms of
energy efficiency of the households.
In particular, the increase of utility rates, requirements for installation
of individual heat meters, awareness raising and education, provision
of concessional financial resources for heat supply points upgrade
these are the incentives for households to opt for energy efficiency.
Issuing from these incentives, common sense, logic and rationalism, the
households must make economical decisions in terms of payment for
services, management of property in favor of energy efficiency.
But actually it does not happen, because this problem is not a priority
to households. The reason for it is subsidizing of tariffs on housing and
utilities, and as a result a small share in the cost of services in the
general budget of household expenses. It thwarts economic incentive
for energy efficiency.
Business units are legal bodies operating in the construction and
operation sector. Accordingly, profit is the main motivation for their
creation and development. Hence, the decision in favor of energy
efficiency should also ensure the maintenance or increase of the
planned income.
However, to meet the energy efficiency requirements takes
additional time and expenses for obtaining and processing information,

, !

43

personnel training, technologies, and new

materials and equipment. These costs are
not recouped, because at the moment the
energy efficiency is not a priority value to
the households, which increases the risk
of declining economic viability and profit of
the business unit. This situation hiders the
progress of energy efficiency.
Establishing long-term relationships with
households is a guarantee of success in the
market by way of stable profit earning. Creating
of quality building and providing servicing in
its operation would form a positive business
reputation to a business unit.
Consequently, the quality criteria at this
level of relations are most essential. Energy
efficiency in this case must be regarded as
an essential element of the buildings quality
parameters at the current stage.
Households are the end users of the
created finished product in the form of estate
property in the course of its operation. However,
due to different levels of education, awareness,
initiative, available time, they are not able to fully
control the acceptance of the object in terms
of energy efficiency parameters. Moreover,
households do not perceive the acquisition of
Green Quarter. Astana
an apartment as part of a single whole, of one
building, which does not give them the opportunity to fully monitor its
Introducing the practice of informing citizens about the energy
quality.
efficiency class of the object on the stage of public hearings, on the
Lack of control of the factual energy efficiency at the completion passport of the facility in the sale of apartments and subsequent
of construction of the facility, does not allow assessing the quality of operation of the facility would speed up the movement to a new mentality.
its construction and conformity to energy efficiency class, indicated in
Leadership of the state, demonstrating the value of energy efficiency
design, which is also a barrier to the achievement of energy efficiency.
A household is an indication to the customer, making the decision
on the characteristics of the object, as the households form demand
for real estate property. In this case, the more educated and informed
the representative of the household and the higher the number of such
people, the higher the demand for the new-standard housing. However,
the demand for energy efficient accommodation is low. Absence or lack
of households awareness of the energy efficiency class of the building
is a barrier to energy efficiency.
In the upkeep of the building, the households are not able to make
management decisions in energy, heat and water consumption, as a
decrease or increase in the consumption of resources does not tell on
the actual payment on utility bills. Nor can they influence the resourceproviding organizations quality of services. The consumers very small
influence in it is a barrier to energy efficiency.
These barriers can be grouped on three main positions:
Information Quality Monitoring. Accordingly, these very indicators
The life cycle of a building has four main phases:
can and should become the guidelines for removing of the barriers and
1) The initial (pre-investment) phase,
improvement of the situation.
2) The investment phase,
Awareness raising is a complex process because it influences the
3) The operational phase,
peoples mentality and lifestyles and, therefore, takes a long time to
4) The liquidation phase.
produce tangible results.
Each of these phases is composed of several
Positive change in the awareness is accumulation of its critical mass
stages, determining the sequence of actions
with subsequent transition from quantity to quality. This breakthrough
that reveal the main stages of the cycle (from
can be achieved primarily through the implementation of pilot projects,
investment idea to the commissioning of
extension of good practices in energy efficiency, creation of information
the constructed object, its state registration,
centers, and support to the growth points in energy efficiency, training
operation proper and in the long run its
and improvement of literacy in this area.
liquidation), also the legal requirements
Economic instruments in the form of changes in the tariff policy,
(conditions, administrative procedures),
access to concessional financial resources that are directed to the
compliance with which is mandatory during
goal of energy-efficient construction and operation, are also part of the
these stages.
information (awareness) block.

44

in the ideological policy would also help to overcome the inertia of

thinking in this area.
I believe that EXPO 2017 is able to become a powerful information
breakthrough in the consciousness of both rank and file citizens and
managers making strategic decisions, since it will showcase the latest
energy-efficient technologies in action.
Improvements in Quality can be achieved by displacement of control
from separate production processes or types of materials onto holistic
perception of the estate property as a finished product.
The building as a consumption product has its technical and
economic characteristics total area, living area, usable area, selling
area and building volume. It should also have qualitative characteristics
at that, energy efficiency including.
Thus, the energy performance certificate of a building can and should
be a tool to ensure the quality parameters, set on the design stage until
a decision on its liquidation. This document at that, should be formed
at the stage of investor decisions to invest in the construction, until the
removal of the object. Non-departmental body of standardization or
environment should control the availability of this document at all stages
of the investment cycle, which can exclude departmental approach to it.
To remove barriers in Control, the following actions are offered.
1. Energy efficiency class of the object is determined by the investor
(basing on the master plan for the area development, the functional
purpose of the object, its location, technical feasibility for connection
to utility networks, supply and demand in the market). In developed
conceptual decision of the property object, the investor (customer,
developer) declares the energy efficiency class of the building (structure)
to the competent authority on the basis of the regulatory requirements
set by the State;
2. During the decision on preliminary design, the architecture
department verifies the presence of the declared energy efficiency class
and reflects it in the architectural-planning assignment as a binding rule
for the design. Business unit includes this norm in the design and survey
works for the designer.
3. In carrying out the designing works, the design organization
provides a set of solutions for achieving the desired energy efficiency
class. The result of these decisions should be the estimates of the
energy performance of the object as a confirmation of the given class of
its energy efficiency.
4. The state expertize department monitors the quality of the
design solutions to achieve the desired energy efficiency class.
To obtain a positive expertize conclusion, coordination with nondepartmental body is required as an intermediate step in controlling
the energy efficiency class.
5. In the process of construction the quality control services
(contractor, technical supervision of the customer, the architectural
supervision of the design organization, GASC) ensure that construction
and installation works are in accordance with the project while
maintaining the parameters of the equipment, coefficient of resistance
of thermal conductivity in the exterior walls materials and the quality
of the works. Deviations from the design are coordinated with the
architectural supervision body, which takes care that the heat and power

characteristics of the materials and equipment used in the facility are

saved and are not below the designed characteristics.
6. In the start-up of the building, its real heat power characteristics
are checked to determine its actual energy efficiency class, achieved
on completion of the construction. In case it is lower than the given
parameter, the causes must be found out and actions are required to
achieve it during the warranty operation period.
7. Acceptance of the object in operation in case of reduced energy
efficiency by not more than one class is permissible, with documented
customer commitments to achieve the initial parameters of energy
efficiency within the warranty operation period. Authorized body for energy
efficiency is involved in the acceptance of the building in operation and
is responsible for acknowledgment of the quality parameters of energy
efficiency. Energy performance certificate, as part of post-completion
documentation, is further handed over to the operating organization as
a declaration of compliance with the norms and standards of energy
saving and energy efficiency.
8. During the operation period, the authorized by households
operating organization establishes relations with the resource providers,
basing on the energy performance certificate, monitors quality and
quantity of heat, water and energy, actual performance of the buildings
heat and power characteristics, conducts energy audits and implements
the recommended energy efficiency measures.
Removal of these barriers to energy efficiency will speed up achievement
of the strategic goal of sustainable development in the country.
Kapchagai solar plant

45

Energy conservation at schools as a

contribution to environmental protection
United Nations Development Programme in Kazakhstan and the European Bank for Reconstruction and
Development (EBRD) have completed a joint project Demonstration of energy efficiency improvement in
public buildings on the example of school number 25 in Astana. In the first days of September the school
students, teachers, parents and guests attended its presentation.
Opening the event, coordinator of Kazakhstan Government
UNDP/GEF project on energy efficiency in housing, utilities and
construction, Alexander Belyi recalled that heating account for the bulk of
energy losses in our country. About 30% of all the energy resources in
the country are used in the construction and housing sectors. The main
consumers of this energy are resident houses and social facilities. He said
that among other social facilities, school buildings deserve a special focus.
Public buildings should be reconstructed in order
to reduce heat losses, budget expenditures on
utilities and negative impact on the environment.

Improving the energy efficiency in school buildings is necessary

to make them comfortable to learn in. Comfort in school buildings is most
essential for emotional, moral, intellectual and physical development of
students. It is also important that the fulfilled project will result in reduced
expenses on consumption of heat and hot water and improve heating of
the classrooms. It is especially relevant now, with the growing rates on
energy sources, when the utility services can hardly handle the load on
heating, Alexander Belyi said.
Many schools built back in the Soviet times, have a common
problem - the heat and resources loss, because of the outdated
thermal insulators, worn down window and door frames, the lack of
heat accounting and regulating systems. If these problems are properly
addressed, the energy loss can be reduced by 40%.

46

The main indicator for comparing energy efficiency in the

organizations of public utilities, including in schools, is the specific
energy consumption per 1m2 a year (kWh/m2 year). The studies carried
out in Kazakhstan show that so far not all the buildings, funded from the
state budget, are equipped with heat meters. And there are more than
10 000 budget-funded facilities in the country. After the installation of
meters in all of them, charge for heating will be annually decreasing by
more than 3 billion tenge at the total cost of simultaneous installation of
metering systems at the public sector facilities making 3,5 billion tenge.
Judging by the experience of Astana and Almaty, the installation of
automatic heat control systems in the municipal institutions can reduce
energy consumption by at least 500 000 tenge annually, which is a 25%
saving on utility bills. Analysis of the situation in energy efficiency and
energy saving in the residential sector, according to a survey conducted
in more than 100 municipal community organizations, shows that the
total potential of energy saving is 25 to 40% of public utility charges.
The payback time of funds under common energy saving measures
in public buildings, even at current rates, is not more than 3 years. In
the capital, the UNDP already has a positive experience of thermoupgrade in lyceum 15 and the school for gifted children Zerde.
School number 25 was built in 1963 for 1 200 student seats. The
building consists of the main and the adjoining gym premises. The
main building overlooks the east. The total area of the building used
in the calculations is 3214 m2 and the total heated area is 11 803 m3.
Currently, the school is on two- shift learning and caters to over 1600
students. On the state program for the school buildings reconstruction
in Astana, its heating, water and sanitation system was rebuilt in 2009.

Anar Omarova, Head of

the EBRD Office in Astana:
The authors of the project have
tried to reconstruct the school to make
it warmer and lighter, comfortable for
children to learn at, and leaving only
pleasant memories of childhood school
years- the best years of life.
The Bank carries out a lot of
such projects in different cities and in
different countries. The total investment
is about $ 13 billion. In Kazakhstan, we
have invested nearly $ 800 million in
the projects that save 10% of consumed electric power.
AynurSospanova,
Director of Renewable Energy
Department of the RK Energy
Ministry:
The project of school
modernization
improves
the
school students life and saves the
environment. It is for our descendants
to see Astana as beautiful, for the
planet Earth to flourish, not to pollute
it by greenhouse gas emissions. I urge
you to take care of your environment.
Give all the best in our life to children.
Sayran Gaisina, director of
secondary school number 25:

The EBRD selected DAppoloniacompany as a consultant in energy

efficiency for the energy assessment and development of steps to
further upgrade of the building. This analysis was carried out for the
technical and financial assessment of the total consumption level in
order to best identify opportunities for the buildings upgrade, purposed
to its energy efficiency.
In 2011, DAppoloniacompany conducted a technical evaluation
and proposed measures for the school building reconstruction. This work
was accomplished by a local company and local experts in collaboration
with UNDP and the EBRD, Alexander Belyi specified. Under the
Expected benefits are:
32-37% reduction of heat consumption
Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions
by 150-200 tons a year
Improving the microclimate in the school building
Contribution to environmental education
project, experts also offered to replace the windows, install an automated
heating unit and adjust the heating system of the gym. The project was
implemented on the grant, given to the school in 2011, at the annual
meeting of the EBRD. EUR 160 000 went to purchase and installation
of energy efficient windows, upgrading of heat consumption systems of
the new school building, including the installation of automated thermal
point with weather-depending automatics.
Now the school heating system is directly connected to external heat
networks and has a control valve and a group of mixing circulation pumps,
said Alexander Entin, general director of Enkom-ST, who installed the heating
unit. The new equipment will give heating on weather compensation

Thanks to the United Nations

Development Programme and the
financial support of the EBRD, our
school has a thermal unit, and the
old wooden windows were replaced
by new energy efficient ones. All the
summer we have been working hard
for our children to come to learn to a
completely new building.
The school became more
spacious, brighter and comfortable. On
behalf of students, parents and teachers of the school I thank all those,
who in a short time have accomplished the building upgrades.
In preparation for EXPO 2017, we foster in our students an attitude
of energy conservation and environmental friendliness.

Stefan
Liller,
Deputy
Permanent
Representative
of
the
United
Nations
Development Programme in
Kazakhstan:
Since 2010, the EBRD and
UNDP are working together with the
Government of Kazakhstan and local
companies on environment projects.
Energy conservation is a critical issue,
and we willingly share in such projects
around the world and provide technical
solutions in energy saving issues.
Usually modernization, made on such projects saves 25-30% of energy,
and investment returns within 3 years.
In this school we see a practical example of how the energy
conservation should be carried out. Installed in it energy saving windows
and equipment are but a small contribution to a big work. It will be useful
to the city, the ecology and the students, studying in a comfortable
environment. Such projects will spread throughout the country.

47

principle, that is, depending on the actual outdoor temperature. Balancing

valves are set, enabling an even distribution of heating on all the standpipes.
There will be no more complaints about uneven heating of some classrooms.
A controller runs the entire process, enabling the equipment transfer to a
more economical mode of basic heating.
Automated thermal unit (ATU) was installed to regulate the
temperature in the school premises during the heating season.
The schools hot water system was connected through plate heat
exchangers, maintaining a constant temperature in the DHW circuit. Hot
water will also depend on water tempering. The gyms heating system
was reconstructed.
We believe that the right heat distribution will reduce the heat
consumption by 3237%, Alexander Entin said. And we must not

stop at the achieved results, but go on installing radiator thermostats to

make the schools energy saving measures complete.
A representative of ALCON + LLP Baurzhan Mukhamedzhanov
said that in summer all the wooden windows at school were replaced
by energy efficient translucent structures with reduced thermal
resistance not below RFr0,8m2 C/Watt, with a special energy
saving glass with a special coating that reflects infrared rays, which
carry the heat back into the room. The new windows will reduce heat
loss to save on electricity costs.
Representatives of contractors promised assistance to the school in
the further operation of the installed equipment, and UNDP undertakes
the analysis of the economic benefits of the project in order to replicate
the experience in other schools of the country.

Project of UNDP / EBRD and the Government of Kazakhstan Republic

Demonstration of energy efficiency improvement in public buildings on the example
of school No 25 in Astana.
Brief description of project
The project Demonstration of energy efficiency improvement in public buildings on the example of school number
25 is aimed at showcasing the improvement of educational environment for students in a typical office building
in Astana as part of a general approach of organization (EBRD) to neutralization of greenhouse gas emissions
(carbon footprint). The main goal of this project is improving the energy efficiency of school buildings, basing on
the recommendations of energy auditors.
The project will result in reduced city budget expenses for the consumption of heat and electricity in the school
building and improve the provision of school facilities, where the children and staff are, with heating. This is
particularly relevant given the growing rates on energy sources and shortage of public heating capacities. It will
also mitigate the impact on the environment by reducing greenhouse gas emissions as a result of a more rational
use of heating in the building.
Time of the program: 2010-2015.
Project Budget: $ 224,023
EBRD: $ 204,023
UNDP (in-kind contribution): $ 20,000

48

Energy conservation in schools

as a contribution to the global
climate protection
Astana is a young capital, ever-evolving and moving ahead. In all
the 16 years Astana has developed from a backwater to a world-class
city. Currently a great number of high-rise buildings are constructed,
modelled on Japanese and American projects. Economic and political
relations are developing fast. In short, we can confidently position
ourselves as a successful country. Our school keeps pace with all these
developments. This year, school 25 has undergone major upgrades.
Firstly, the school grounds have been transformed beyond recognition:
there is a new basketball field, improved football pitch and a lot more.
And most importantly, in our school old wooden windows were replaced

with new energy-saving plastic windows (177 windows in all). This was
done in order to reduce heat loss through the school buildings envelope.
This project is designed to fully equip our school. In conclusion, on behalf
of the students of our school I would like to thank everyone who took
part in this project, namely: the United Nations Development Programme
in Kazakhstan, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development,
heads of organizations who shared in the program.

1 , , .
.
, . ,
,
. .
,
,
. .

, .
.
.
.

Diana Tymoshenko
Grade 10 B, school No 25

,
8

25

49

Songdo

. Songdo .

.

Songdo 610
( ) . 2010 , 2020
350 . 3,2 2
75 000
. (4,7 2) 300 000
.

40 %-

,

.
- :
.


.
.
, -
: 40%-
.
40-
(Songdo Central Park) .
:
.
II Central Park

100- . ,

. ,

( ) . ICT
(information communication technology)

( 30- 100%-
) .
35%- .

Songdo - .
. .
.

-
. ,

50

Convensia

. . -
,
.

2013 POSCO Green Building

.
5 571 2, , ,
. POSCO
Green Building BEMS (building energy management system

) BMS (building management system
) . BEMS
, (
..
), OLED (organic lightemitting diode )
.

51

Topical problems of the organization of

design and construction of energy efficient
buildings in Kazakhstan
A research under UNDP / GEF project was
recently carried out on the observance ofenergy
efficiencyrequirements of the buildingson the
pilot territory of Astana, which found that about
30% of the studied buildings fall short of the
regulatory requirements that were in effect
at the time of construction1. Experts of the
project attribute it to a set of factors, underlying
the algorithm of the process of design and
construction of energy efficient buildings
from the time of formation of the technical
specifications for the design of the object to its
commissioning and subsequent maintenance.
We will try to point out the stumbling blocks in
this process.

Alexander Belyi, Coordinator of Kazakhstan Government - UNDP / GEF projects in energy

efficiency in housing and public utilities and construction
Kazakhstan has basically formed the regulatory framework for energy
efficient design and construction of residential buildings. These are:
1. The Law On energy saving and energy efficiency.
2. Building Codes BC RK 2.04-04-2011 Thermal protection of
buildings.
3. RK Government resolution of August 31, 2012 1117 On
approval of rules defining and revising the class of energy efficiency of
buildings, structures and facilities.
4. Guidance manual to BC RK 2.04-04-2011 Thermal protection of
buildings, based on revised edition 2.
5. Guidance manual to BC RK 4.02-02-2011 Heating, ventilation
and air conditioning (HVAC), based on updated edition.
6. Directory of technical solutions for the design of energy-efficient
residential buildings (2 volumes): volume 1. Enclosing parts; Volume
2.Engineering systems.
7. Method of energy audits of residential buildings.
8. The system of electronic testing for independent knowledge
verification of experts, performing technical oversight, authorial
supervision, technical inspection and examination of projects and of the
state inspectors in energy conservation and efficiency.
9. RK Government Resolution of September 13, 2012 1192
On approval of requirements for energy conservation and energy
efficiency requirements for pre and (or) the project (design and estimate)
documentationof buildings, structures and facilities.
10. Resolution of the RK Government of September 11, 2012
1181 On establishing the requirements for energy efficiency in buildings,
structures and their elements that are part of the enclosures.
11. Resolution of the RK Government of December 29, 2012 1784
On Approval of the Rules for the examination of energy conservation
and energy efficiency.
12. Energy 2020 program.
It is not a complete list of documents that have been adopted to

52

ensure energy efficient design and construction in Kazakhstan. However,

as shown by the analysis carried out in the framework of the UNDP /
GEF project, in practice, various deviations are revealed from the order
prescribed in the documents, which eventually leads to non-energy
efficient building. Such deviations can be traced back to the very start
in the processorganization. Thus, in the customers technical design
specification of the object, the energy efficiency class of the future
building is often not indicated. However, under the RK Government
decree of August 31, 2012 1117, the customer is required to specify
the desired class of energy efficiency for predesign, and design and
estimate documentation.
Design companies have insufficient capacity of design based on the
established class of energy efficiency. The UNDP / GEF projects had such
a problem before, while implementing the projects on existing residential
buildings thermo-modernization (in 2011-2013). Design companies
developing projects failed to make appropriate documentation based
on the established specific heat consumption (class of the building). But
according to the RK Government resolution of August 31, 2012 1117,
in predesign and (or) design (design-estimate) documentation energy
efficiency class of the building must be indicated.
It should be noted that in the BC RK 2.04-04-2011 and manuals
to BC RK Thermal protection of buildings, made in the framework
of the UNDP / GEF project, in contrast to previous documents,
calculating method of the reduced R-value is changed; the notion of
specific values of thermal protection of the building was introduced, its
normative values were set; estimation of vapor permeability of walling
was revised; thermo-physical estimation of hinged facade systems with
ventilated air layer was given, calculating method of vapor permeability
of walling was refined; the number of energy efficiency classes was
increased to 10 (from A++ to F).
At the same time the standard B RK 2.04-21-2004 remains operating
in Kazakhstan, which is contrary to the RK Government Resolution

Green office. LLP Ergonomics.

1181 of 11.09.2012. And standard BC RK 2.04-04-2011 is still not enacted.
This hinders development of project design works towards improving
energy efficiency of residential and public buildings. In the Regulation
and standards more progressive methods are offered for calculating
thermal performance of the buildings, classification of buildings on energy
efficiency, closely adapted to that practiced in the European Union.
It is known that during the design,the Building Energy Rating
Certificate (BER Certificate) is made, in which energy efficiency class
is indicated, and which is attached to the main DED(design estimate
documentation). It should be noted that designers often make BER
assessment formally. After the BER is made, it should be checked by
a competent person who confirms the energy efficiency class of the
designed building, which is currently not done. Nor are the statistics run
on energy efficiency class of the designed and constructed buildings.
Experts working in the UNDP / GEF projects, point to another shortfall:
in the examination of the design documentation, the expert report the
most sought document does not indicate energy efficiency class of
the building, making it difficult to monitor its energy efficiency during its
operation. With regard to projects on thermal upgrades of the buildings,
unfortunately, energy rating certificates (energy passports) are not made
as a rule in such projects.
Nevertheless, according to the requirements of SNIP
RK 1.02-01-2007* (construction rules and regulations) Instruction
on the development, coordination, approval and content of the design
documentation for construction, energy rating certificate of the building
must be provided for the expert examination. In this examination, the
design and operating parameters indicated in the energy rating certificate
are checked for compliance with regulatory requirements. Assessment of
energy efficiency class of buildings is not provided for in the current rules
on drawing expert report, which is a gross omission.
In the first place, the customer, for whom the building is designed,
must be interested in energy-efficient construction. However, the
customer does not conduct the examination of energy conservation
and energy efficiency of pre and (or) the project (design and estimate)
documentation. Meanwhile, according to the RK Government resolution
of August 31, 2012 1117, for determination of energy efficiency
compliance with the indicated class in the pre and (or) of the project
(design and estimate) documentation, the customer refers to the legal
entity, accredited for this type of activity, to do it.
The authorities, who oversee the construction progress, do not fully
control the observance of energy efficiency standards in it. The UNDP/GEF
analysis found that these issues are not sufficiently addressed in the
work of the supervisory bodies. From the long list of documents, studied
by mostly building inspectors, only passports and quality certificates
for materials, products, structures and equipment can be attributed
to energy efficiency control. Experts point out that under the existing

circumstances, when objects with a normal level of responsibility

(risk) constitute asignificant proportion,and with insufficient staff of
building inspectors in State Architectural and Construction Supervision
departments (GASKs), the checks consist in obtaining the necessary
information from the representatives of the authorial and technical
supervision, and reports on the construction quality from the customer
(contractor), with their subsequent analysis. Therefore, the quality of
control is largely dependent on the reliability of the information provided.
Under the current government regulations the technical supervision
is carried out by the customer or an engineering company providing
relevant services on the contract with the customer; and supervision is
performed by the project developer or other organization, to which the
developer delegated the appropriate authority; but it is also on the basis
of the contract with the customer.
Thus, one of the factors required for building control funding is
administered by the customer. In view of the existing mentality it has
a strong influence on the objectivity, accuracy and completeness of
the building control, and in practice cases are not infrequent, when the
construction quality control is not at the proper level.
After the building is constructed as envisioned its energy
performance certificate is required for the quality control in the
acceptance of the building and its subsequent operation.
However, UNDP/GEF experts note, after acceptance, the buildings
energy performance certificate is practically unclaimed to assess its
energy efficiency. In practice it turns out that the building energy rating
certificate is used just to make an appearance that the requirements
for energy indicators and project documentation are met. And its main
purpose to be a tool to further improve the energy efficiency of
buildings is overlooked at that. It is because one of the requirements
filling out the energy passport of the building at the operation stage by
the organization operating the building- in fact is not respected or is
observed just occasionally.
The root cause of most of the above-mentioned shortcomings is
lack of accountability mechanism and of preferences for compliance
of the constructed buildings with a particular class of energy efficiency.
Alongside that, BC RK 2.04-21-2004 recommends actions for the RK
administration: in the construction of A and B class buildings (very
high and high) economic incentives should be applied; and vice
versa in the construction of class G buildings (low) and below it
to apply penalties. So far this rule exists in BC only in advisory form and
to all appearances should be implemented in practice.
In the next issue of the news bulletin we will continue the above
topics and will try to formulate key recommendations to improve energy
efficient design and construction in Kazakhstan, including the ones
obtained in the pilot project of the UNDP/GEF project Energy-efficient
house in Karaganda.

10

53

 !


.


.
57


.
,
/-

, ,

-

.

54

. ,
. ,

. , , ,
.
,
.

.

.

.

,
.
, , - 50 . ,
,
, / .
.
.

, .
,
,
, .

 .
,

.

, .
Polyset.kz :

() - (), .
. ,

. .
,
.
, -
,
. -
,
, .
? 200 - .
. ,
, ,
.
.
, .

.

.
. :
,
, .
. -

.
, . . -, - .
+280 +480- , . ,
. 900-
.
,
.
, ,
. , .
.
, . , ,
,
.
, 57 ,
, . 27350-
. 500- .
.
.
, ,
/- .
.
, . ,
.
,
.
,
.
,
. ,

.

55

 www.eep.kz