Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
Energy
Available
Available Procedia
online
online 00 (2018) 000–000
atatwww.sciencedirect.com
www.sciencedirect.com
Energy Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

Energy
EnergyProcedia
Procedia153 (2018) 000–000
00 (2017) 450–454
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
5th International Conference on Energy and Environment Research, ICEER 2018
5th International Conference on Energy and Environment Research, ICEER 2018
Comparison between eco-management and audit scheme and ISO
Comparison between eco-management and audit scheme and ISO
The 15th International Symposium 14001:2015 on District Heating and Cooling
14001:2015
Assessing the feasibility Florinda Martins
FlorindaP. Martins
of using
a,
a,
*, Luisthe
*,António
heat
Fonseca
LuisBernardino
Fonseca b demand-outdoor
b

REQUIMTE/LAQV/ISEP (School of Engineering,

a
Porto), Rua Dr. de Almeida 431, 4249-015 Porto, Portugal
temperature
a b
REQUIMTE/LAQV/ISEP function
ISEP (School of Engineering,
(School for P.Rua
P. Porto),
of Engineering, aPorto),
long-term
Dr. António Antóniodistrict
Rua Dr.Bernardino heat
de Almeidade431,
Bernardino demand
4249-015
Almeida 431, Porto, forecast
Portugal,
4249-015 Porto, Portugal
b
ISEP (School of Engineering, P. Porto), Rua Dr. António Bernardino de Almeida 431, 4249-015 Porto, Portugal,

I. Andrića,b,c*, A. Pinaa, P. Ferrãoa, J. Fournierb., B. Lacarrièrec, O. Le Correc

Abstract
a
IN+ Center for Innovation, Technology and Policy Research - Instituto Superior Técnico, Av. Rovisco Pais 1, 1049-001 Lisbon, Portugal
Abstract b
Veolia Recherche & Innovation, 291 Avenue Dreyfous Daniel, 78520 Limay, France
Traditional approaches
c to protect environment usually rely on a legal framework that enforces measures and behaviors on
Département Systèmes Énergétiques et Environnement - IMT Atlantique, 4 rue Alfred Kastler, 44300 Nantes, France
organizations. However,toto protect
Traditional approaches achieveenvironment
sustainabilityusually
it is necessary
rely on to a apply other tools that need
legal framework a stronger
enforces measurescommitment from the
and behaviors on
organizations
organizations.inHowever,
the three topillars
achieveof sustainable development.
sustainability The implementation
it is necessary of an that
to apply other tools Environmental Management
need a stronger System,
commitment frombeing
the
aorganizations
voluntary instrument,
in the threecan playofan
pillars importantdevelopment.
sustainable role in the environmental pillar because
The implementation it has a structured
of an Environmental approach
Management to manage
System, being
environmental
a Abstract aspects ofcan
voluntary instrument, organizations. The new
play an important rolerevisions of the two most
in the environmental important
pillar becausestandards maintain the
it has a structured previous
approach pattern.
to manage
EMAS (Eco-Management
environmental and Audit Scheme)
aspects of organizations. The new incorporates
revisions of thetherequirements of ISO 14001:2015
two most important while maintaining
standards maintain the previousimportant
pattern.
additional
EMAS requirements
District(Eco-Management
heating networks such
and as Audit
are the Environmental
commonly Scheme) Statement
incorporates
addressed andrequirements
in the the the employee
literature as one ofinvolvement.
ISO 14001:2015
the most The new
effective revision
while of ISO
maintaining
solutions for 14001 by
important
decreasing the
emphasizing
additional
greenhouse organizational
requirements
gas emissions environmental
suchfrom
as the performance
theEnvironmental
building sector. Thesecan systems
Statement be
and a significant
therequire
employeeopportunity
high involvement.
investmentsto increase
The
whichnewsustainability
arerevision given14001
returnedofthrough
ISO the
thefact
by
heat
that this Due
emphasizing
sales. international standard
organizational
to the changed is more conditions
environmental
climate widely implemented
performance canthan
and building EMAS.
be arenovation
significantpolicies,
opportunity heattodemand
increaseinsustainability given decrease,
the future could the fact
that this international
prolonging standard
the investment is more
return widely implemented than EMAS.
period.
©The
2018 Thescope
main Authors. Published
of this paper isby toElsevier Ltd.
assess the feasibility of using the heat demand – outdoor temperature function for heat demand
© 2018
This2018
is anThe Authors.
open access Published
article by Elsevier
under Elsevier
thelocatedLtd.
CC BY-NC-ND
© forecast.The Authors.
The districtPublished
of Alvalade,by in Lisbon license
Ltd. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
(Portugal), was used as a case study. The district is consisted of 665
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Selection
This is an
buildings and
open
that peer-review
access
vary in under
article
both under responsibility
the
construction CC ofand
BY-NC-ND
period the typology.
scientific
license committee of the 5th International Conference
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Three weather scenarios (low, medium, on Energy
high) and and
three district
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 5th International Conference on Energy and
Environment
Selection
renovation and Research,
peer-review
scenarios ICEER
were
Environment Research, ICEER 2018. under 2018.
responsibility
developed (shallow, of the scientific
intermediate, committee
deep). To of the
estimate 5th
the International
error, Conference
obtained heat on
demand Energy
values and
were
Environment
compared with Research,
results ICEER 2018. heat demand model, previously developed and validated by the authors.
from a dynamic
Keywords:
The resultsEnvironment
showed that management
when only systems; environment;
weather change issustainability;
considered,EMAS; ISO 14001
the margin of error could be acceptable for some applications
Keywords:
(the errorEnvironment management
in annual demand wassystems; environment;
lower than 20% forsustainability;
all weatherEMAS; ISO considered).
scenarios 14001 However, after introducing renovation
scenarios, the error value increased up to 59.5% (depending on the weather and renovation scenarios combination considered).
The value of slope coefficient increased on average within the range of 3.8% up to 8% per decade, that corresponds to the
decrease in the number of heating hours of 22-139h during the heating season (depending on the combination of weather and
renovation scenarios considered). On the other hand, function intercept increased for 7.8-12.7% per decade (depending on the
coupled scenarios). The values suggested could be used to modify the function parameters for the scenarios considered, and
improve the accuracy of heat demand estimations.

© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +351 228340500
Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of The 15th International Symposium on District Heating and
E-mail address:author.
* Corresponding ffm@isep.ipp.pt
Tel.: +351 228340500
Cooling.
E-mail address: ffm@isep.ipp.pt
1876-6102 © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Keywords: Heat demand; Forecast; Climate change
This is an open
1876-6102 access
© 2018 Thearticle under
Authors. the CC BY-NC-ND
Published license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
by Elsevier Ltd.
Selection
This is an and
openpeer-review under
access article responsibility
under of the scientific
the CC BY-NC-ND licensecommittee of the 5th International Conference on Energy and Environment
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Research, ICEER
Selection and 2018. under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 5th International Conference on Energy and Environment
peer-review
Research, ICEER 2018.
1876-6102 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
1876-6102 © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of The 15th International Symposium on District Heating and Cooling.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 5th International Conference on Energy and
Environment Research, ICEER 2018.
10.1016/j.egypro.2018.10.023
 Florinda Martins et al. / Energy Procedia 153 (2018) 450–454 451
2 Florinda Martins et al. / Energy Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

1. Introduction

Sustainable Development (SD) aims to achieve a higher and better level of development considering economic,
environmental and social concerns. Traditional environmental policies relied on mandatory regulation to decrease
pollution and reducing environmental impacts caused by industry and other sources of pollutants. The legislation is a
powerful tool to reduce emissions to air, water, and soil and to protect natural resources and ecosystems. In the
European Union, there are many regulations about environmental issues. However regulatory issues are external to
organizations and in this case organizations’ ultimate goal is to achieve the limits established to avoid penalties and
other intangible drawbacks such as bad reputation or relations with local communities. Environmental Management
Systems (EMS) were created with the goal of helping organizations to better manage their environmental aspects [1].
There are two main reference standards that set out the requirements for an environmental management system,
namely the ISO (International Organization for Standardization) International Standard 14001:2015 [2] and the Eco-
Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) regulated by the European Regulation EC 1221/2009, with the changes
presented in European Regulation EC 1505/2017 [3,4]. These two standards are based on a different environmental
policy approach because they are voluntary.
Concerning the most relevant difficulties to adopt EMS, from an internal perspective, the costs of its
implementation and of using cleaner technologies, are usually stated in the literature [5]. From an external perspective,
the more relevant difficulties mentioned are obstacles in different local and international environmental legislation [5]
and integration through the overall supply chain [6]. The two systems were recently revised and this work performs
an analysis of both systems identifying the main changes in each of them and addressing key aspects that can show
the differences between them, which can be valuable information for organizations that want to implement an EMS
and improve its environmental performance.

2. ISO 14001

ISO 14001 is an International Standard based on the concept that better environmental performance can be achieved
when environmental aspects are systematically identified and managed.
The revised standard ISO 14001:2015 presents some aspects that are completely new and others that were modified.
Some changes are due to the new requirements that affected the way some of the other requirements are applied. In
this analysis, the requirements that will be addressed are the ones that bring some novelty by themselves. For example,
understanding the organization and its context falls into the category of new requirements. It is a consequence of the
adoption of Annex SL, which intends to harmonize the standards concerning management systems. This is a strategic
requirement and organizations should consider the external and internal questions, including environmental issues that
can affect or be affected by its environmental performance [7]. Strategic tools such as SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses,
Opportunities, and Threats) and PESTEL (Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Legal, and Environmental) can
be used for those purposes, [8]. Understanding the needs and expectations of interested parties is also a new
requirement since it adopts a new and deeper approach to this issue. In the 2015 ISO 14001 edition, it is necessary to
identify the relevant interested parties (customers, employees, suppliers, shareholders, local community, authorities,
etc.) and their needs and expectations and determine which of them will become obligations of the organization [2].
Organizations should focus on issues or changing circumstances related to the needs and expectations of (relevant)
interested parties (including regulatory requirements) and local, regional, or global environmental conditions that can
affect, or be affected by, the organization. Once identified as a priority, actions to mitigate adverse risk or exploit
beneficial opportunities are integrated into the operational planning of the EMS and organizations are expected to
adopt proactive initiatives to protect the environment from harm and degradation [7]. In the determination of the scope
of the EMS, the most significant change is related to consideration of new requirements previously mentioned.
Leadership and commitment is also a new requirement. In this requirement, top management is held responsible for
EMS and although there is the possibility of delegating responsibilities to others, the accountability for the
effectiveness of EMS remains attributed to it. The existence of a management representative in this version is not
required. Environmental policy is not a new requirement but has an innovative approach because it expands the
commitment of organizations to include aspects such as sustainable resource use, climate change mitigation and
adaptation, etc.
452 Florinda Martins et al. / Energy Procedia 153 (2018) 450–454
Florinda Martins et al. / Energy Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000 3

The requirement for actions to address risks and opportunities is new because it goes beyond the old concept of
preventive actions [8]. In the 2015 ISO 14001 edition, the organizations that adopt it should determine the risks
(negative) and the opportunities (positive) related to its environmental aspects, compliance obligations and other
context issues. The novelty is also present in the environmental aspects requirement since it is introduced the life cycle
perspective. Life cycle thinking and related methodologies such as life cycle assessment are important tools to achieve
Sustainable Development and are being applied to find more sustainable solutions [9, 10]. Organizations will need to
extend its control and influence the environmental impacts associated with product use and end-of-life treatment or
disposal. The communication requirement has significantly changed because it is necessary a process for internal and
external communication (what, when, whom and how). There is a recommendation for delivering factual, accurate
and truthful information and that, for example, complaints should have a prompt and clear answer. In the requirement
Monitoring, measurement, analysis, and evaluation there is a significant change because now organizations will have
to evaluate their environmental performance by establishing criteria and indicators. It reinforces the relevance of the
continuous improvement of the organization’s environmental performance.
Reflecting the technological advances in managing information ISO 14001:2015 incorporates the concept of
‘documented information’, instead of ‘documents’ and ‘records’ [7].
Recent research on ISO 14001:2015 perceived benefits reports that the “integrated approach with other
management sub-systems”, the “alignment with business strategy”, the “improved top management commitment”,
and the “improved internal and external communication”, are the major benefits achieved by organizations that have
already been successfully certified accordingly to the ISO 14001 2015 edition [11].

3. EMAS

The relevant revisions in the new EMAS 2017 edition, are related to the “Understanding the organization and its
context”, “Understanding the needs and expectations of interested parties”, “Leadership and commitment”, “Actions
to address risks and opportunities”, “Environmental aspects”, and “Management review” [12]. With the EMAS’
revision organizations should determine the organizational context of their environmental management system and
identify the interested parties and their relevant needs and expectations. For EMAS this means that external and
internal issues that can affect the ability of the organization to achieve the goals established for its EMS should be
determined. Issues such as climate, water quality, political, legal, etc. should be considered. These factors can
potentially affect the EMS and if it is the case they should be included in the environmental review [13]. In this
situation, as mentioned for ISO 14001, a SWOT and/or a PESTEL analysis could be applied. The identification of
interest parties and their relevant needs is also similar to ISO 14001. In addition, it should consider a life-cycle
perspective when assessing the significance of their environmental aspects. However as in ISO 14001:2015 it is not
necessary to conduct a full life cycle assessment.
Finally, organizations should determine the risks and opportunities related to their EMS to help prevent undesired
effects or accidents, that are obstacles to the intended organizations’ outcomes and that don’t contribute to a continuous
environmental performance. Main changes are in Annex I (Environmental Review) and Annex II (EMS
Requirements). Annex III (Internal Environmental Audi) has been only slightly modified and Annex IV
(Environmental Reporting) has not been changed [13].

4. Comparison between ISO 14001:2005 and EMAS (revision 2017)

Figure 1 summarizes the main formal and system similarities and differences between the two standards. Several
aspects were considered in this analysis, namely regulatory, geographical applicability, goal, organizational,
organization’s context, leadership, legal compliance, environmental aspects, employee involvement, external
communication, and internal audit. The main differences are highlighted in orange.
The main drivers to adopt ISO 14001 are external stakeholders’ pressure, application to green investments while
the implementation of EMAS is mainly influenced by internal motivations [14,15]. Since ISO certification has no
structured link to authorities the commitment to improve environmental performance is weaker than in EMAS
registration. In ISO certification the strongest improvement in environmental performance occurs in the initial phase
 Florinda Martins et al. / Energy Procedia 153 (2018) 450–454 453
4 Florinda Martins et al. / Energy Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

of certification [16]. The new revision of ISO 14001 puts emphasis on organizational environmental performance
which can be an opportunity to increase sustainability given the fact that is worldwide accepted standard.

Improvement of EMS to enhance Improvement of environmental

environmental performance Objective performance

Voluntary Implementation Voluntary

Global Geographical applicability Global

Issued by a non-governmental
organization with members from ISO 14001 EMAS
European regulation 1221/2009
the national standards bodies European regulation 1505/2017

Identification of the external and Identification of the external and

internal aspects and of the needs and Context of the organization
internal aspects and of the needs and
expectations of interested parties expectations of interested parties

EMAS has a Management

Top management shall demonstrate representative that may be a member
leadership and commitment Leadership
of top management

Requires a process to identify Environmental review according to

environmental aspects; Environmental aspects Annex I;
Life cycle perspective Life cycle perspective

Training for employee; Active

Training for employee Employee involvement employee involvement since they
are considered a driving force

Open dialogue with the public, the

Dialogue with external interested External communication authorities and other interested
parties is not require; External parties; External reporting needed:
reporting is not necessary environmental statement

EMS and requirements of the Internal audit Environmental performance,

standard effectiveness of the EMS and legal
compliance

Link to authorities
No structured link Official registration by authorities

Fig. 1. Formal and system similarities and differences

5. Conclusions

EMS are useful tools for organizations to manage their environmental aspects. The new revisions of ISO 14001
(2015) and EMAS (2017) maintain the previous trend. EMAS contains all the requirements of ISO 14001:2015, having
additional items such as the Environmental Statement and employee involvement. The two standards include new
454 Florinda Martins et al. / Energy Procedia 153 (2018) 450–454
Florinda Martins et al. / Energy Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000 5

items such as the context of the organization, the needs and expectations of interested parties and the life cycle
perspective which are also relevant to SD.

References

[1] Campos, L. M. S., Heizen, D. A. M., Verdinelli, M. A., Miguel, P. A. C. 2015. Environmental performance indicators: a study on ISO 14001
certified companies. J CLEAN PROD, 99, 286-296
[2] ISO. (2015), ISO 14001 environmental management systems - requirements.
[3] European Commission. 2009. Regulation (EC) Nº 1221/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council
[4] European Commission. 2017a. Regulation (EC) Nº 1505/2017 of the European Parliament and of the Council
[5] Oliveira, O.J. de, Serra, J.R., Salgado, M.E., 2010. Does ISO 14001 work in Brazil? J CLEAN PROD, 18, 1797-1806.
[6] González-Benito, J., Lannelongue, G., Queiruga, D. 2011. Stakeholders and environmental management systems: a synergistic influence on
environmental imbalance. J CLEAN PROD, 19, 14, 1622-1630
[7] Fonseca, L.M.C.M. da, (2015). ISO 14001:2015. An improved tool for sustainability. Journal of Engineering and Management, 8(1), 37-50.
[8] AFNOR. 2015. Transition Guide, Revision of the ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 standards, Key points of the 2015 versions
[9] Brito, M., Martins, F. 2017. Life cycle assessment of butanol production. Fuel 208, 476–482
[10] Martins, F., Machado, S., Albergaria, T., Delerue-Matos, C. 2017. LCA applied to nano scale zero valent iron synthesis. INT J LIFE CYCLE
ASS, 22, 5, 707–714
[11] Fonseca, L.M., Domingues, J.P. 2018. Exploratory Research of ISO 14001:2015 Transition among Portuguese Organizations. Sustainability,
10, 781.
[12] EMAS, 2017 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/emas/join_emas/emas_global_en.htm , accessed in September 2017
[13] European Commission. 2017b. The revised annexes of the EMAS regulation
[14] Testa, F., Rizzi, F., Daddi, T., Gusmerotti, N.M., Frey, M., Iraldo, F., 2014. EMAS and ISO 14001: the differences in effectively improving
environmental performance. J CLEAN PROD, 68, 165-173
[15] Neugebauer, F., 2012. EMAS and ISO 14001 in the German industry e complements or substitutes? J CLEAN PROD, 37, 249-256.
[16] Brouwer, M.A.C., van Koppen, C.S.A., 2008. The soul of the machine: continual improvement in ISO 14001. J CLEAN PROD, 16, 450-457