Energy and Buildings 143 (2017) 162–172 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Energy and Buildings j ourna l ho me pa g e: www.elsevier.com/locate/enbuild Achieving Nearly Zero-Energy Buildings by applying multi-attribute assessment Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas a,* , Jurgita Antucheviciene a , Darius Kalibatas a , Diana Kalibatiene b a Department of Construction Technology and Management, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Saul ˙ etekio al. 11, Vilnius, LT-10223, Lithuania b Department of Information Systems, Faculty of Fundamental Sciences, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Sauletekio al. 11, Vilnius, LT-10223 , Lithuania a r t i c l e i n f o Article history: Received 31 January 2017 Received in revised form 14 March 2017 Accepted 15 March 2017 Available online 18 March 2017 Keywords: Nearly Zero-Energy Buildings (NZEBs) Passive house Multi-attribute decision making (MADM) Indoor environment WASPAS ARAS TOPSIS a b s t r a c t According to the Directive (2010/31/EU), the main goal in the energy performance of buildings, especially for achieving longer-term objectives in the energy saving, is achieving Nearly Zero-Energy Buildings (NZEBs). Thus, this plan can be achieved by refurbishing of existing or by constructing new buildings to satisfy NZEB requirements. Nowadays, refurbishment of existing buildings to satisfy NZEB requirements becomes one of the major aim in construction. In solving this refurbishment problem, Multi-Attribute Decision Making (MADM) methods help here to evaluate existing state of buildings and to compare them with optimal alternative, which equals to NZEB. This comparison allows selecting optimal refurbishment methods to achieve NZEB requirements. However, existing MADM methods do not applied to compare existing alternatives (i.e. buildings) with the optimal alternative (i.e. NZEB), which is based on standards and laws. Usually existing researches present comparison of selected alternatives among each other or with the best alternative from compared, like in the TOPSIS or ARAS methods. Therefore, in this paper, we analyse the concept of a Passive house and NZEB and its applicability in Lithuanian standards and, respectively, define the optimal alternative (i.e. an optimal building). Second, we analyse possibility of extending existing MADM methods to be MADM optimal (MADM-opt). Moreover, we present several modifications how to transform WASPAS, ARAS and TOPSIS by adding optimal alternative. The modified methods were applied for evaluation of 13 apartments. The results show that MADM-opt is useful for the assessment of alternatives and their evaluation according to the optimal alternative. Moreover, it allows determining difference between the assessed alternatives and the optimal alternative. © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Based on the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (Direc- tive 2010/31/EU) [1] and the Energy Efficiency Directive (Directive 2012/27/EU) [2], the greatest energy saving potential lays in build- ings. According to the Directive (2010/31/EU), the main goal in the energy performance of buildings (EPBD), especially for achieving longer-term objectives in the energy saving, is achieving Nearly Zero-Energy Buildings (NZEBs), where NZEB have very high energy performance and the required amount of energy comes mostly from renewable sources. According to the Energy Performance of * Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: edmundas.zavadskas@vgtu.lt (E.K. Zavadskas), jurgita.antucheviciene@vgtu.lt (J. Antucheviciene), darius.kalibatas@vgtu.lt (D. Kalibatas), diana.kalibatiene@vgtu.lt (D. Kalibatiene). Buildings Directive [1], all new buildings must be NZEB by the end of 2020 and all new public buildings must be NZEB by 2018. Thus, this plan can be achieved by constructing new buildings to satisfy NZEB requirements or by refurbishing of existing buildings to satisfy NZEB requirements. However, nowadays refurbishment of existing buildings to satisfy NZEB requirements and users’ needs becomes one of the major aims in construction. In general, in terms of sustainable development and sustainable construction, refur- bishment of buildings is preferred to new construction. This helps to save energy and building materials in construction phase, also reduces generation of waste and other emissions. Seeing that in Europe over one third of buildings are older than fifty years [3], their refurbishment to satisfy today’s needs and requirements becomes a topical question. However, buildings are of different physical and moral depreciation, have different location in a city that determines their value and perspectives of conversion and further use, and http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.03.037 0378-7788/© 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.