Reliable and objective data regarding building stock is essential for predicting and analyzing energy demand and carbon emission. However, China's building stock data is lacking. This study proposes a set of China building floor space estimation method (CBFSM) based on the improved building stock turnover model. Then it measures China's building stocks by vintage and type from 2000 to 2015, as well as building energy intensity (national level and provincial level) and energy-efficient buildings. Results showed that total building stocks increased significantly, rising from 35.2 billion m2 in 2000 to 63.6 billion m2 in 2015, with the average growth rate 4.0%. The deviations were well below 10% by comparing with China Population Census, which validated the reliability of CBFSM and the results. As for energy intensity, urban dwellings and rural dwellings showed relatively stable and increasing trend respectively. The commercial building energy intensity saw a downward trend during “12th Five Year Plan” period. This indicated the effectiveness of building energy efficiency work for commercial buildings since 2005.38.6 billion m2 residential dwellings and 5.7 billion m2 commercial buildings still need to be retrofitted in future. CBFSM can overcome shortages in previous studies. It can also provide Chinese government with technical support and data evidence to promote the building energy efficiency work.

Building energy efficiency standards (BEES) are believed to be one of the most effective policies to reduce building energy consumption, especially in the case of the rapid urbanization content in China. However, there is little evidence backed up by measured data to validate the actual effectiveness of BEES in China. Using survey data collected from 1128 households in Chongqing China, this study applied the propensity scores matching method to estimate the effect of two BEES levels: the 50%-BEES (low level) and the 65%-BEES (high level). Results show that buildings built with 65%-BEES, on average, can reduce cooling and heating electricity use intensity (kWh/m2/a) by 41%, compared to buildings in the absence of the BEES. Meanwhile, the adoption of 50%-BEES can reduce cooling and heating electricity use intensity (kWh/m2/a) by 38%. However, energy savings are not significant if comparing buildings with 65%-BEES and 50%-BEES. The results indicate that there exists a performance gap between calculated design performance savings and actual operation energy savings. These empirical findings provide policymakers with valuable feedback on buildings’ actual performance. The findings suggest that it is necessary to incorporate outcome-based compliance pathways into the current BEES system. Lastly, a data-driven building policy evaluation mechanism should be developed in China. Energy consumption databases should be developed to support policies such as building energy codes and standards’ development and performance evaluation.

This study uses the total-factor energy productivity change index (TFEPCH) to investigate the changes in energy productivity of construction industry for 30 provincial regions in China from 2006 to 2015, adopting the improved Luenberger productivity index combined with the directional distance function. In addition to traditional economic output indicator, this study introduces building floor space under construction as a physical output indicator for energy productivity evaluation. The TFEPCH was decomposed into energy technical efficiency change and energy technical progress shift. Results indicate that, first, energy productivity of China’s construction industry decreased by 7.1% annually during 2006–2015. Energy technical regress, rather than energy technical efficiency, contributed most to the overall decline in energy productivity of China’s construction industry. Second, energy productivity in the central region of China decreased dramatically, by a cumulative sum of approximately 77.1%, since 2006, while energy productivity in the eastern and western regions decreased by over 54.3 and 65.3%, respectively. Only two of the 30 provinces considered—Hebei and Shandong—improved their energy productivity during 2006–2015. The findings presented here provide a basis for decision-making and references for administrative departments to set differentiated energy efficiency goals and develop relevant measures. Additionally, the findings are highly significant for energy and resource allocation of Chinese construction industry in different regions.

China's energy consumption in the building sector (BEC) is not counted as a separate type of energy consumption, but divided and mixed in other sectors in China's statistical system. This led to the lack of historical data on China's BEC. Moreover, previous researches' shortages such as unsystematic research on BEC, various estimation methods with complex calculation process, and difficulties in data acquisition resulted in “heterogeneous” of current BEC in China. Aiming to these deficiencies, this study proposes a set of China building energy consumption calculation method (CBECM) by splitting out the building related energy consumption mixed in other sectors in the composition of China Statistical Yearbook-Energy Balance Sheet. Then, China's BEC from 2000 to 2014 are estimated using CBECM and compared with other studies. Results show that, from 2000 to 2014, China's BEC increased 1.7 times, rising from 301 to 814 million tons of standard coal consumed, with the BEC percentage of total energy consumption stayed relatively stable between 17.7% and 20.3%. By comparison, we find that our results are reliable and the CBECM has the following advantages over other methods: data source is authoritative, calculation process is concise, and it is easy to obtain time series data on BEC etc. The CBECM is particularly suitable for the provincial government to calculate the local BEC, even in the circumstance with statistical yearbook available only.