Humans are increasingly influencing the climate and the temperature of the Earth by burning fossilfuels, destroying forests, and raising livestock. This adds massive amounts of greenhouse gases(GHG) to those already present in the atmosphere, amplifying the greenhouse effect andcontributing to global warming. The building sector accounts for a significant amount ofgreenhouse gas emissions. Decarbonizing the building industry can result in significant emissionreductions in the future years. Sweden's energy and climate goals have been updated, and some ofthem include reducing GHG emissions in the building sector, increasing energy efficiency, andmaking electricity production 100 percent renewable. In Sweden, energy renovations in singlefamily houses (SFHs) have the potential to reduce GHG emissions and improve energy efficiency,but the rate of energy renovations remains low because of financial, social, and behavioral barriers.This thesis aims to use LCA and LCC methodologies to assess energy renovations on SFH inVäxjö by combining various combinations of energy efficiency measures (EEMs) to reduce energyuse. The energy performance and eight different renovation scenarios using different EEMs havebeen evaluated for the selected single-family building. To evaluate building renovation measures,we developed a method based on life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle cost (LCC) thatincorporates building information modeling (BIM). Five different renovation measures werecombined in eight scenarios in this research, including different thicknesses of thermal insulationfor walls and roofs, triple-glazed windows, and doors with different U-values, air-source heatpumps, mechanical ventilation with heat recovery, and solar photovoltaic. The present cost valuesof renovation measures over 50 years for LCC calculation were calculated. The global warmingpotential (GWP) of each renovation measure was estimated over 50 years using One-click LCA.According to the findings of this thesis project, scenarios 1 and 8 had the lowest and highestreductions in primary energy number, respectively. Scenarios 5, 6, 7, and 8 are the most costeffective in comparison to other scenarios. All scenarios resulted in a reduction in GWP impactfrom an LCA perspective in which scenario 7 resulted in the highest reduction in GWP impact.