U-Values for Better Energy Performance of Buildings Study for Eurima Presentation during the Sustainable Energy Week 2008

Transcription

1 U-Values for Better Energy Performance of Buildings Study for Eurima Presentation during the Sustainable Energy Week 2008 Brussels, January 08 Thomas Boermans

2 Quantifying the potential I II III IV & V VI Climate Protection Regulation Cost Effectiveness Enlarged EU Price Scenario

3 Key figures from these studies 40% Energy 270 billions/y 3.3 million barrels/d 460 millions tons CO 2 /y jobs (Eurima estimate) Energy price ref: 70$/barrel

4 Trias Energetica

5 Objectives of the study Ecofys VII TO DEFINE the optimum U-values based on economic and environmental criteria, for all countries in Europe. TO INVESTIGATE whether there is room for improvement in reconsidering national requirements (U-values) for building components. TO IDENTIFY the impact of insulation on cooling energy demand in hot climate regions.

6 Starting point EPBD Energy Performance of Buildings Directive EPBD whole building energy performance National or regional whole building requirements Energy performance requirement per building component in practice + U-values either as design criteria or component requirement Economic optimum Environmental goals

7 U-value - coefficient of heat transmission (1) 21 C 21 C W/m 2 K low U-value = low energy transfer

8 U-value - coefficient of heat transmission (2) 21 C 21 C winter low U-value = low energy transfer summer

9 Insulation & cooling demand in Seville TRNSys: Energy demand cooling Sevilla SFH [kwh/m²a] Insulation: wall 0,6 / roof 0,5 / floor 0,5 W/m²K [kwh/m²a] reference no shading high int. gains no night vent. low mass without insulation with insulation

10 U-values - economic optimum Economical parameters: Energy price scenario WEO 2006 Peak Price (Oil: $70 / barrel) Energy mix Investment costs & Interest rate Climatic conditions for 100 cities characterized by HDD and CDD Life cycle costing over a period of 30 years

11 U-values - climate change IPCC: To keep temperature increase below 2 C, global GHG emissions should decrease by 50% by 2050 compared to 1990 EU commitment: Reduction GHG emissions by 60% - 80% by 2050 Buildings: the highest energy consumer the most cost effective CO 2 mitigation measure technical solutions available should contribute above average The study assumed that buildings should contribute with a reduction of 85% of GHG emissions by 2050

12 Savings from heating and cooling for one element of the construction Costs + Annual investment costs Insulation thickness* Energy costs cooling + heating = Costs - A negative cost represents a SAVING *Indication of the thermal performance of the element

13 From cost optimum to U-values Costs + More comfort More sustainable EXISTING HOUSING STOCK Present NEW BUILDING REQUIRE- MENTS U-value 2,00 Example Minimum BEST PRACTICE* 1,50 0,6 0,40 0,30 0,20 0,15 State of the art 0,12 0,10 *Based on oil price study hypothesis

14 Whole building approach & Passive House Costs + economic optimum roof insulation wall insulation Total energy related investment costs extra for triple glazing/ventilation floor insulation avoidance heating system BEST PRACTICE Costs - Energy savings Passive House optimum

15 Whole building approach & Passive House Costs + economic optimum roof insulation wall insulation Total energy related investment costs extra for triple glazing/ventilation BEST PRACTICE Passive House floor insulation concept is not avoidance heating system considered in the study Costs - ECOFYS VII Energy savings Passive House optimum

16 Roof insulation current and optimum (1) < 0,14 W/m²K >0,59 W/m²K Present U-values WEO2006 scenario

17 Roof insulation current and optimum (2) < 0,14 W/m²K >0,59 W/m²K Present U-values Peak price scenario

18 Comparison wall, roof and floor insulation (1) Present U-values WEO 2006 scenario

19 Comparison wall, roof and floor insulation (2) Present U-values Peak price scenario

20 U-values comparison U-values Stockholm U-values Amsterdam WEO 06 Peak price Post Kyoto building reg. WEO 06 Peak price Post Kyoto building reg. 0,6 0,6 0,5 0,5 0,4 0,4 [W/m²K] 0,3 [W/m²K] 0,3 0,2 0,2 0,1 0,1 0,0 wall roof floor 0,0 wall roof floor U-values Warsaw U-values Seville WEO 06 Peak price Post Kyoto building reg. WEO 06 Peak price Post Kyoto building reg. 0,6 1,6 [W/m²K] 0,5 0,4 0,3 0,2 0,1 [W/m²K] 1,4 1,2 1,0 0,8 0,6 0,4 0,2 0,0 wall roof floor 0,0 wall roof floor

21 Conclusions (1) In 2007, most requirements for U-values for wall, roof and floor in new buildings are below the economic optimum -> Cost saving opportunities are lost for households as well as for society U-values recommended in the study are valid for new as well as for existing buildings -> There is room for improvement for new AND for existing buildings

22 Conclusions (2) Almost identical recommended U-values, for maximum cost effectiveness and for post Kyoto targets -> Good economy and climate protection are not contradictory. Fast action needed for 2020/2050 targets. Insulation (especially roof and wall) reduces energy demand for cooling of residential buildings -> This adds a new perspective to insulation in Southern Europe.

23 Further information Ecofys Germany, Cologne Tel +49 (0) Avenue Louise 375, Box 4 B-1050 Brussels, Belgium Tel +32 (0)