Overview and future challenges of nearly zero energy buildings (nZEB) design in Southern Europe

In times of great transition of the European construction sector to energy efficient and nearly zero energy buildings (nZEB), a market observation containing qualitative and quantitative indications should help to fill out some of the current gaps concerning the EU 2020 carbon targets. Next to the economic challenges, there are equally important factors that hinder renovating the existing residential building stock and adding newly constructed high performance buildings. Under these circumstances this paper summarises the findings of a cross-comparative study of the societal and technical barriers of nZEB implementation in 7 Southern European countries. The study analyses the present situation and provides an overview on future prospects for nZEB in Southern Europe. The result presents an overview of challenges and provides recommendations based on available empirical evidence to further lower those barriers in the European construction sector. The paper finds that the most Southern European countries are poorly prepared for nZEB implementation and especially to the challenge opportunity of retrofitting existing buildings. Creating a common approach to further develop nZEB targets, concepts and definitions in synergy with the climatic, societal and technical state of progress in Southern Europe is essential. The paper provides recommendations for actions to shift the identified gaps into opportunities for future development of climate adaptive high performance buildings. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19 in the Periods of Delta and Omicron Variant Dominance in Greece: Determinants of Severity and Mortality

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been a pandemic since 2020, and depending on the SARS-CoV-2 mutation, different pandemic waves have been observed. The aim of this study was to compare the baseline characteristics of patients in two phases of the pandemic and evaluate possible predictors of mortality. Methods: This is a retrospective multicenter observational study that included patients with COVID-19 in 4 different centers in Greece. Patients were divided into two groups depending on the period during which they were infected during the Delta and Omicron variant predominance. Results: A total of 979 patients (433 Delta, 546 Omicron) were included in the study (median age 67 years (54, 81); 452 [46.2%] female). Compared to the Omicron period, the patients during the Delta period were younger (median age [IQR] 65 [51, 77] vs. 70 [55, 83] years, p p = 0.001), had higher procalcitonin levels (ng/mL): 0.08 [0.05, 0.17] vs. 0.06 [0.02, 0.16], p = 0.005, ferritin levels (ng/mL): 301 [159, 644] vs. 239 [128, 473], p = 0.002, C- reactive protein levels (mg/L): 40.4 [16.7, 98.5] vs. 31.8 [11.9, 81.7], p = 0.003, and lactate dehydrogenase levels (U/L): 277 [221, 375] vs. 255 [205, 329], p p p 2/FiO2 ratio on admission were identified as independent predictors of mortality for patients in the Omicron period. Conclusions: In the Omicron wave, patients were older with a higher number of comorbidities, but patients with the Delta variant had more severe disease and a longer duration of hospitalization