As expected, the accuracy of the "Building Fuel Efficiency Navigator" is amazing!!

As expected, the accuracy of the "Building Fuel Efficiency Navigator" is amazing!!
Recently, a certain construction company in Hokkaido sent us a simulation result of a building fuel efficiency navigation system and a simulation of a certain Q value calculation software.
As a result, we were able to receive data on actual utility bills after living there for a year.
In Hokkaido, it is common for buildings to be heated throughout the building, so the residents lived their lives almost exactly as they had in the simulation.
So it was perfect data to see how much deviation there was between the simulation and reality.
Since the Building Fuel Efficiency Navigator can also simulate utility costs, we compared the actual utility costs using only the Fuel Efficiency Navigator.
The result was that the annual utility bill was 17 yen in the simulation, but the actual bill was 152200 yen, which is 112% of the simulation.
This was within the margin of error. Utility bills vary from household to household due to various factors.
The reality is that there is a huge difference between those who pay a lot and those who don't. This time, we only compared one house, so
Although the results are not statistically collated, I still think this is an impressive result.
We also examined the results when the heating and cooling periods were separated.
The result was that the heating period was 115% of the actual period.
The cooling period is 151% of the actual time.
It was that.
The heating situation seems to have been almost exactly as simulated, but the cooling period was in Hokkaido.
It is believed that this result was due to the fact that the temperature was so low that the residents spent most of the time without using air conditioning.
The results of another Q value calculation software can calculate heating and cooling loads, but
The result was that the heating load was 40% of the fuel efficiency rating of the building.
The cooling load was an astounding 519%.
Utility bills are not just determined by heating and cooling costs, but both
It's no small thing.
The heating result is 40% according to the fuel economy navigation system, which has a relatively close value.
It means it's too small.
Also, the fuel economy navigation system shows a higher than actual load, but the cooling load is much larger than that.
If this is the case, then the air conditioning load must be completely wrong.
So, even though they are all simulation software, the results vary greatly.
There is.
Furthermore, the software on which the country bases its standards is this software.
This means that the results tend to be smaller than the heating load.
I have heard the outrageous story that the C value (airtightness) is calculated as zero.
The standard for the C value has been removed and the calculation is done assuming there is zero gap...
It's a story I cannot understand at all.
However, I still thought the calculation accuracy of the Building Fuel Efficiency Navigator was amazing.